Search for: "47 DEFENDANTS"
Results 3701 - 3720
of 4,838
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Jun 2023, 10:59 pm
Australia has a fragmented regime for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments; see generally Michael Douglas, Mary Keyes, Sarah McKibbin and Reid Mortensen, ‘The HCCH Judgments Convention in Australian Law’ (2019) 47(3) Federal Law Review 420. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm
Following a long and somewhat sleepy existence on the margins of contractual interpretation case law, force majeure clauses (“FMCs”) found themselves subject to a rude awakening with the global onset of COVID in 2020, and consequent interruptions to all manner of contracts relating to global supply chains, major sporting events, and many other facets of business. [read post]
4 Sep 2008, 11:49 am
Slip op. at 47-49 (distinguishing Kallas amicus brief because the FDA was discussing a different drug in the same class).From any perspective, that's cutting the salami pretty thin. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 5:35 am
Technically, this was section 509 of the Communications Decency Act, which created § 230 of Title 47, 110 Stat. 133, 137 (1996), but it's colloquially called section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. [2]. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 8:51 am
The judge ruled for both the claim of the Plaintiff and the counterclaim of the Defendant and denied any damages to either party. _______________________________________________________ In another June 2023 decision in Munoz v. [read post]
Arrested For Online Solicitation of a Minor? The Right Houston Criminal Lawyer Can Make a Difference
24 Jul 2012, 11:57 am
As a result of the increased efforts of local and national law enforcement task forces to discover Online Solicitation of Minors or Importuning, Houston Sex Crimes Lawyer Charles Johnson has frequently represented individuals who have been accused of communicating with a minor using the computer. [read post]
23 Sep 2017, 12:39 pm
Of the case, MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL v. [read post]
[Sasha Volokh] Can a state immunize its agencies from federal antitrust law through judicial review?
13 Sep 2016, 7:16 am
Second, the “substance” of this judicial review focuses on the wrong issue: whether the defendant’s acts are unreasonable in an antitrust sense, not (as Midcal requires) whether the Board’s acts comply with state policy as determined by a disinterested official. [read post]
13 Apr 2021, 6:49 pm
The intent that embraced the creation and development of the social insurance system has given the Court a rational and logical basis, consistent with public policy, to order medical marijuana for palliative care.The syllabus prepared by the Office of Clerk is as follows:In this appeal the Court considers the challenges brought by defendant M&K Construction (M&K) with regard to a workers’ compensation court’s order (the Order) that M&K reimburse plaintiff… [read post]
19 Mar 2015, 4:57 pm
Supp. 2d 589) begins:On January 14, 2011, plaintiff Butamax™ Advanced Biofuels LLC ("Butamax") filed suit in this district against defendant Gevo, Inc. [read post]
24 Jul 2020, 3:00 am
Constellation appealed and defendants cross appealed. [read post]
13 Jun 2021, 8:47 pm
Instead, the Bill was introduced as following, The Protecting Elections and Defending Democracy Act, 2021, is a bill that builds on the important safeguards passed by this Legislature to defend the essential voice of Ontarians in their own elections through the Protecting Ontario Elections Act. [read post]
14 May 2009, 12:34 pm
This, the defendants argue, is the required result applying the decision of Pittfield, J in Bowen v. [read post]
8 Jul 2022, 12:30 pm
Louis SWAT officers raid home, shoot man dead, and place an AK-47 next to his body. [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 1:58 am
The defendants argued that the words did not suggest the claimant had broken any rules. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 10:07 am
Newton, 2011 SCC 47 (Canadian Sup. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 9:11 pm
Little, 51 F.3d 45, 47 (5th Cir. 1995); Cantrell, 85 F.Supp.2d at 682. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 7:40 am
ARC Industries, Inc., 47 Ohio St.2d 146, 351 N.E.2d 113 (1976) (to succeed on a motion for relief from judgment under Civ.R. 60(B), a movant must establish (1) a meritorious defense or claim to present, in the event that relief from judgment is granted, (2) entitlement to relief under one of the provisions in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5), and (3) compliance with the rule’s time requirements). [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:41 am
Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeal was not plainly wrong and its judgment should not be interfered with: [23]-[38], [45]-[47], [50]-[60]. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 6:00 am
See supra § IV.B.1 and n. 47-48. [read post]
