Search for: "State v. David Harding"
Results 361 - 380
of 1,834
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Sep 2020, 4:05 pm
Writing before the decision of the Court of Appeal in ZXC v Bloomberg LP [2020] EWCA Civ 611, Professor David Rolph commented in his illuminating chapter on the case in Landmark Cases in Defamation Law (Hart Publishing, 2019), ‘the policy of the law has decisively changed. [read post]
20 May 2012, 4:38 am
In a famous case that went all the way to the Supreme Court, Forest Grove School District v. [read post]
2 Sep 2017, 5:33 pm
For example, Harding observes critically a tradition where important concepts in science, such as objectivity v. subjectivity, reason v. emotion, and mind v. body, were considered to have a gendered quality; with the former being masculine and the latter being feminine.[10] Similarly, I ask critically here if the distinction I’ve drawn between “tools” and “cyberspace” is susceptible to the same assumptions. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 6:59 am
Finally, there's a lengthy analysis by David Musker of Kohler Mira v Bristan, a rare case on pecuniary and non-pecuniary relief for design infringement, on Class 99.Lex specialis. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 9:01 pm
It is hard to see any of these things as unconstitutionally compelled speech. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 11:08 am
David Allen with RCI was up next. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 4:36 am
Just in time for the SEC’s 80th birthday (tomorrow is 80 years since the ’34 Act was signed into law), comes this news from Paul Weiss (we will be posting memos in our “SEC Enforcement” Practice Area): Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a significant decision in SEC v. [read post]
4 Jun 2015, 4:52 am
” 1Fox News Network, LLC v. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 2:04 pm
Yet I can’t see any reason why, for example, one would believe judges would be especially good at figuring out the right balance between the acknowledged state interest in preserving human life and the “fundamental right” to terminate pregnancy, as the Supreme Court has been doing since Roe v. [read post]
10 Aug 2010, 4:24 am
” Carnegie v. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 4:00 am
" Judge Bramlette stated that the requested fees were excessive given the fact that this was a “run-of-the-mill state law case. [read post]
18 Feb 2019, 10:05 am
So under modern antidiscrimination principles, if a state argued that it was banning Israel-related boycotts to protect Jews from anti-Semitism a court would have a hard time gainsaying the notion that this is also a "compelling interest. [read post]
7 Nov 2019, 10:40 am
That's hard to say. [read post]
10 Sep 2022, 6:35 am
In Construction Consulting, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Aug 2008, 4:09 pm
In United States v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 7:36 am
The pattern in the dots in this case is that hard to miss. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 5:00 am
Professor Tushnet notes that structural remedies (such as Brown v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 9:01 pm
In Fisher v. [read post]
2 Oct 2007, 7:33 am
In United States v. [read post]
16 Jan 2007, 10:55 am
Remember insurance is a voluntary business and if David Rosmiller is correct that State Farm was surprised its recent Katrina verdict (Broussard v. [read post]
