Search for: "Baker v. English" Results 21 - 40 of 210
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2015, 2:35 pm by Molly Runkle
This afternoon the Court granted review in Whole Woman’s Health v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 3:36 pm by Andrew Hamm
This morning the Court announced its decision in King v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 9:07 am by Samuel Bray
Baker, An Introduction to English Legal History 161 (5th ed. 2019). [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 3:22 am by Amy Howe
Briefly: Ronald Mann has our coverage of Wednesday’s second oral argument, in the bankruptcy fees case Baker Botts L.L.P. v. [read post]
17 May 2013, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
(Hat tip: H-Law) Marc Lender discusses his book on Gitlow v. [read post]
5 Sep 2022, 2:18 am by Nick Austin and Mike Adamson
The question of whether demurrage liquidates all or just some of the damages arising from a charterer’s breach in failing to complete cargo operations within the laytime has divided practitioners and academics for decades and, more recently, the English Court in K Line Pte Ltd  v. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 2:40 pm by Molly Runkle
This morning the Court granted review in United States v. [read post]
7 Sep 2020, 2:34 am by Nick Austin and Mike Adamson
Public today: an important judgment handed down by the English High Court this morning has re-opened the door to recovering damages in addition to demurrage for losses caused by exceeding laytime in cargo operations. [read post]
26 Feb 2015, 6:48 am by Amy Howe
”    In the Supreme Court Brief (subscription required), Tony Mauro covers yesterday’s second oral argument, in Baker Botts L.L.P. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 2:42 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Judiciary Law 487 is an attorney related statute that derives from one of the oldest English laws, carried over to New York statutes. [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 3:19 am by Edith Roberts
The first is Microsoft v. [read post]
13 Mar 2011, 12:42 pm by Nicholas Gibson, Matrix.
The Court of Appeal (Sedley, Richards LJJ, Sir Scott Baker) endorsed the Divisional Court’s finding on the first preliminary issue. [read post]