Search for: "State, in Interest of Ms" Results 21 - 40 of 7,007
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 May 2024, 6:29 am by centerforartlaw
By Harper Johnson and Suzanna Neal Museums in the United States, whether they be federally, state, or privately owned (including those run by universities), are ever-faced with claims that items in their care have incomplete or illicit provenance.[1] This is reflective of a broader trend among museums in the Western world, which are facing more frequent and stronger calls to repatriate works that were looted during colonial periods or were otherwise unethically obtained.[2] This… [read post]
14 May 2024, 2:13 pm by Yosi Yahoudai
The change was prompted by a conflict-of-interest claim raised after their boss, Assistant Dist. [read post]
12 May 2024, 8:43 am by Giles Peaker
This led to Ms B seeing new solicitors, who in May 2023 wrote to WF stating that the housing duty had not been ended. [read post]
8 May 2024, 1:58 pm by Eugene Volokh
Doe alleges that he was the winner of the Maine State Lottery,  that Ms. [read post]
6 May 2024, 9:20 am by Eugene Volokh
In pointing out the virtues of transparency, I do not intend to downplay the privacy interests of those who have experienced sexual assault. [read post]
6 May 2024, 6:49 am by Dan Bressler
He told the Daily Journal, a legal publication, that there is no conflict since he is ‘adverse to the People of the State of California’ in both cases. [read post]
6 May 2024, 4:43 am by INFORRM
The statement, which is available to read in full here, outlines how the regulators will work on areas of mutual interest and share information. [read post]
3 May 2024, 8:11 am by Eugene Volokh
In pointing out the virtues of transparency, I do not intend to downplay the privacy interests of those who have experienced sexual assault. [read post]
2 May 2024, 5:53 am by Tom Joscelyn
Trump and others allegedly executed a “catch and kill” scheme to prevent Ms. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am by Bernard Bell
Justice Barrett, writing for the Court, noted that the Court’s state action jurisprudence has largely focused upon “whether a nominally private person has engaged in state action,” not whether a state official had acted as a private citizen rather than a state actor. [read post]