Search for: "US v. David Rich" Results 21 - 40 of 441
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Nov 2017, 12:37 pm by Bernie Burk
  This one has everything—a rich and powerful sexual predator, secret agents, the New York Times and, most exhilarating of all, nuanced conflict of interest, confidentiality, and ethical supervision questions. [read post]
26 Jun 2009, 5:50 am
In a previous post I erroneously stated that the appeal of Canwest Mediaworks Publications v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 4:27 am by David Bernstein
(David Bernstein) In Justice Breyer’s dissent in Sorrell v. [read post]
1 May 2010, 1:22 am by INFORRM
  The then Lord Justice Neuberger was one the Court of Appeal judges in the seminal 2005 privacy decision in Douglas v Hello! [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 11:19 pm
"Clearly, the Court of Appeal envisages much wider use of pre-nuptial agreements in future.In a long article David Hodson analyses the judgment in detail and assesses its impact. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 3:33 am by Edith Roberts
Robin Grieff and Hillary Rich provide a preview at Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 10:41 am by Schachtman
Matrixx Initiatives is a rich case – rich in irony, comedy, tragedy, and error. [read post]
13 Aug 2018, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
Historical Research on Islamic Law, Lena Salaymeh41. 'By the Light of the Moon': Looking for China's Rich Legal Tradition, Tahirih V. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 4:09 pm by INFORRM
  Churchill was one of its ‘founding fathers’ and the original text was drafted by British MP and lawyer/Nuremberg prosecutor Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 4:27 am by Edith Roberts
Robin Grieff and Hillary Rich preview the case for Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 2:50 pm by A.J. Levy
” Please leave a comment if you or others have used video and other rich media in PDF files. [read post]
15 Nov 2016, 4:40 pm by INFORRM
The Mail on Sunday has described the judgment as an “alarming restriction on press freedom follow[ing] a series of cases in which rich, famous and powerful figures have used privacy arguments to avoid stories from harming their reputations” and, given the importance of the issues decided in the case, it is likely to be appealed. [read post]