Search for: "Turner v. Bounds" Results 21 - 40 of 103
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Apr 2021, 1:53 pm by Emily Coward
Murray, 476 U.S. 28 (1986) (plurality), and in cases where “racial issues [are] inextricably bound up with the conduct of the trial,” Ristaino v. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm by Mahmoud Khatib
First, the letter of intent can be a binding contract with all necessary terms.[15] The parties are bound in recognition that a contract was reached, even though the parties anticipated further formalities.[16] “Such an agreement is preliminary only in form—only in the sense that the parties desire a more elaborate formalization of the agreement. [read post]
16 Jul 2020, 6:33 am by Phil Dixon
To determine whether a detainee’s constitutional rights have been violated by a jail or prison, the court applies the “legitimate penological purposes” test from Turner v. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 12:42 pm by Elliot Setzer, William Ford
Anderson, Rashawn Ray, Nicol Turner Lee and Jon Valent, and will be moderated by Elaine Kamarck. [read post]
2 Dec 2019, 12:25 pm by Gordon Ahl
West and Nicol Turner Lee for a panel discussion. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 2:51 am
More importantly, within the EU anti-suit injunctions are incompatible with the Brussels I Regulation (cf. the ECJ decision in Turner v. [read post]
30 Jul 2019, 11:03 am by Noel Francisco
Dreeben argues in Turner v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 1:01 am by INFORRM
One of the columnists cited by White was Janice Turner, whose many negative articles about trans people (sample headlines: ‘Children Sacrificed to Appease Trans Lobby’ and ‘Trans Ideologists Are Spreading Cod Science’) have caused widespread fury in LGBT circles. [read post]
5 Jan 2019, 3:06 pm by familoo
 A useful summary of this can be found in a case called Flannery & Anor v Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 81, where the Court of Appeal said :   (1) The duty is a function of due process, and therefore of justice. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 3:50 am by SHG
” Yesterday, in Turner v. [read post]