Search for: "Spells v. Spells"
Results 2961 - 2980
of 3,205
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Sep 2024, 11:13 am
Ofcom’s consultation does not spell out in terms what interpretations have been assumed for the purposes of the draft Codes of Practice, Guidance and other documents that Ofcom is required to produce. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 2:15 pm
We are skeptical that Heckler v. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 11:00 am
While we did not look exhaustively, the only mention by the Fifth Circuit of “prima facie” in the Daubert context comes from the well-known Moore v. [read post]
8 Jul 2021, 6:00 am
” I also have concerns about the instability of the compact – partly for the reasons Foley and Levinson spell out and also for a somewhat different reason: even if the NPVIC were to clear all of the political and constitutional hurdles and actually become law, there is little reason to believe that it would remain in force permanently – or even for very long. [read post]
14 Apr 2020, 9:00 pm
Under Roe, state laws banning or restrictively regulating abortion were invalid.After two decades of backlash and maneuvering by the anti-abortion movement (including violence against clinics and providers), the Court revisited Roe in Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
15 Jan 2010, 10:26 am
Pennsylvania:Prigg v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 9:01 pm
” A recruiting brochure spells out the image in more detail. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 1:22 pm
Thus, in City of Philadelphia v. [read post]
25 May 2011, 12:47 pm
Paul V. [read post]
9 May 2011, 4:35 am
Remember Rudovsky v. [read post]
15 Oct 2023, 4:58 am
If you want to provide specific benefits to a specific employee, the benefits should be spelled out in the specific employment contract. b) Travel. [read post]
1 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm
In Marshall v. [read post]
14 Nov 2024, 9:05 pm
The Supreme Court clarified in the 2017 case NLRB v. [read post]
11 Mar 2008, 1:00 am
Now, if you read this section of the transcript, it appears that Zach Scruggs did not know exactly what was meant by the Jones v. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 8:52 am
Looking to Strasbourg jurisprudence, he commented, “[t]he ECtHR will only find that the state has acted in violation of A1P1” if its judgment is “manifestly without reasonable foundation” (James v United Kingdom (1986) 8 EHRR 123). [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 12:55 pm
Difficulties began when the House of Bishops took up the one Constitutional amendment which had passed at General Convention 1889, namely, an amendment to Article V which would allow General Convention to accept from any diocese a cession of some of its territory, to become a missionary diocese. [read post]
16 Oct 2013, 5:11 am
See Cumbie v. [read post]
1 Nov 2024, 9:17 am
Rich Ford: Everyone who went to law school remembers Shelley v. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 3:33 am
Under Maryland common law, as in New York, there is a strong presumption that an employment relationship is at-will unless the parties contract otherwise by specifying a clear duration of employment or by spelling out reasons for termination, such as just cause. [read post]
16 Oct 2024, 6:06 am
The inability of these intransigents to agree on how to implement the Court’s first such decision in 2009 in Sejdić and Finci v. [read post]
