Search for: "Brown v. Harms"
Results 401 - 420
of 1,657
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2016, 4:07 am
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson famously wrote in his concurrence in Brown v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 3:24 am
Yemshaw (Appellant) v London Borough of Hounslow (Respondent) [2011] UKSC 3 – Read judgment / press summary The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that “domestic violence” in section 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 includes physical violence, threatening or intimidating behaviour and any other form of abuse which, directly or indirectly, may give rise to the risk of harm. [read post]
20 Jan 2022, 7:36 am
appeared first on Evan Brown. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 7:00 am
Brown v. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 7:06 am
(Alef v. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 6:05 am
Brown v. [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 6:59 am
Charles Wilson of the AP reports today on yesterday's 7th Circuit opinion in the case of FreeEats.com, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Oct 2021, 6:20 am
You might remember that the first legal challenge to California’s board gender diversity statute, Crest v. [read post]
21 Jun 2024, 10:21 am
The Supreme Court of the United States recently unanimously ruled against the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) in Starbucks Corp. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2013, 12:50 pm
Brown v. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 10:27 am
., et al. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 8:36 am
When you read the complete text of Hamilton v. [read post]
24 Feb 2017, 6:45 am
State v Brown, 2003-Ohio-3931 (syllabus) (Section 14, Article I of the Ohio Constitution provides greater protection than the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution against warrantless arrests for minor misdemeanors.) [read post]
26 May 2013, 7:59 pm
[1] Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2009, 12:14 pm
His Lordship felt there were three basic propositions of law to consider and apply: (a) it was not enough to give rise to a duty of care that harm was foreseeable (Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] AC 1004); (b) the law did not ordinarily impose positive duties to protect others (Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd 1987 SC (HL) 37; (c) the law did not impose a duty to prevent a person being harmed by a criminal act of a third party merely because such… [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 8:53 am
Reasoning Although Baroness Hale made it look relatively easy, this result was rather more difficult to achieve (as is clear from Lords Rodger and Brown’s judgments). [read post]
7 Dec 2020, 1:39 pm
Seattle Schools and Grutter v. [read post]
2 Jun 2007, 9:04 am
Brown, 2007 U.S. [read post]
13 Dec 2018, 7:31 am
Brown, J.D. [read post]
27 Jul 2016, 4:00 am
Brown was already using against him and to protect himself from the harm caused by that use of force. [read post]
