Search for: "Self v State"
Results 3281 - 3300
of 14,085
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Feb 2009, 11:26 am
By Eric Goldman Woodhull v. [read post]
3 Jan 2023, 5:44 am
They need the state to do it. [read post]
29 Mar 2024, 5:01 am
In Hunter v. [read post]
16 Nov 2014, 7:38 pm
Lee v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 2:10 am
Corp. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2020, 12:54 am
The court considered a number of authorities in this regard, including X and Y v The Netherlands (App no 8978/80) and KU v Finland (App no 2872/02), in which the Strasbourg court had indicated that ECHR, art 8 placed a positive obligation on states to put in place effective deterrence measures against activities which may pose a threat to fundamental values and essential aspects of the private lives of individuals, particularly children and other vulnerable persons. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 8:00 am
” (Able v. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 3:33 am
Now, in United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2010, 6:03 am
Before Ashcroft v. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 3:57 pm
See Harisiades v. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 3:33 pm
an educationalperspective - intro to web 2.0PrivacyBig Brother State - privacy & surveillanceThe Last Enemy extract - life as an un person in an ID card worldACLU pizza delivery - private/public data collection and privacyIP4chords (Axis of Awesome) - creativity, mash ups, copyright, parodyFilesharing RIAA parody ad (IT Crowd) - filesharing and P2P3 minute medley on the music wars(from TED)Content and tubesThe Internet is For Porn - self explanatoryNet Neutrality,… [read post]
3 Jan 2008, 3:36 am
State v. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 3:45 am
Determining eligibility for representation and indemnification of public employees being suedSalino v Cimino, 1 N.Y.3d 166 Public Officers Law Sections 17 [state officers and employees] and 18 [municipal employees] and other local laws provide for the representation and, if found liable, the indemnification, of officers and employees of the jurisdiction who are being sued -- a significant benefit to such individuals. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 4:30 am
Recently, in Sarro v. [read post]
12 Aug 2011, 12:09 pm
Washburn student intern (and now Houston-area prosecutor), Sean Whittmore and I won in State v. [read post]
2 Aug 2016, 2:42 pm
Hammett v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 6:15 am
Other coverage continued to focus on some of the other amicus briefs filed in Hollingsworth and United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 1:46 pm
Wolens, 513 U.S. 219, 223 (1995), because that applied only to "suits alleging no violation of state-imposed obligations, but seeking recovery solely for the airline's alleged breach of its own, self-imposed undertakings. [read post]
3 Nov 2017, 1:57 pm
The Waymo v. [read post]
2 May 2024, 9:35 am
The court stated that trustees are generally prohibited from self-dealing, but self-dealing may be allowed under § 633A.4202(2) when the transaction is approved by the court after notice to the interested parties. [read post]
