Search for: "People v. Sewell"
Results 21 - 37
of 37
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2016, 4:04 pm
But worse, it cuts right to the core of fundamental computing freedom questions and cues up the next legislative battle to address what software people are allowed to run on their devices. [read post]
24 Dec 2014, 4:00 am
New Case Broadens Deposition Power In RaceTrac Petroleum v. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 12:51 am
Mr Sewell was convicted of her rape and of indecently assaulting two other people in 2014. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 12:12 pm
Peter Vogel of Gardere Wynne Sewell also said that a good line to draw when using social media is to avoid saying anything that you don't want a jury to see. [read post]
5 Aug 2015, 8:46 am
Sewell v. [read post]
28 Mar 2009, 3:18 am
We've had a few tips and seen a number of comments that V&E in particular is being disingenuous. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 3:37 am
If the United Kingdom, as a constitutional monarchy, allows for the notion of a “sovereign people”, then it encompasses all the peoples of the United Kingdom. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 1:01 pm
In today’s case (Thompson v. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 8:56 am
Himsworth has argued that the Sewell Convention would necessitate legislative consent from the Scottish Parliament, likely to be refused. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:21 pm
Sewell (D-Ala.), Rep. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 10:15 pm
v. [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 4:38 pm
An Empirical Observation and Analysis of the Effects of the Serious Harm Requirement in Section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, Charlie Sewell, Inde [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 3:02 am
There is no doubt, however, that the UK Parliament has the power to make arrangements for referendums anywhere within the UK on such issues as it wishes to consult the people on. [read post]
3 Sep 2023, 12:23 am
Douglas Strang, Scottish Legal News: Higgs v Farmor’s School and others. [read post]
22 Jan 2008, 11:47 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, January 17, 2008 US v. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 4:24 pm
In order for a statement to be defamatory, it must make the claimant identifiable (whether explicitly or not) and it must carry a meaning that “[substantially] affects in an adverse manner the attitude of other people towards [the claimant], or has a tendency to do so” (see Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB)). [read post]
23 Mar 2012, 12:42 pm
(Reviewing John Sewell, The Shape of the Suburbs: Understanding Toronto’s Sprawl.) 6 Fla. [read post]
