Search for: "State v. David." Results 4261 - 4280 of 14,260
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jan 2018, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
Judgments The following reserved judgment after a public hearing in a media law case is outstanding: Kennedy v The National Trust for Scotland, heard 21 November 2017 (Sir David Eady). [read post]
5 Jan 2018, 4:33 am by Edith Roberts
For The Economist, Steven Mazie looks at Husted v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 4:55 pm by INFORRM
Rule in Clibbery v Allan In a sense, the case of Clibbery v Allan [2002] EWCA Civ 45, [200] Fam 261, [2002] 2 WLR 1511, [2002] 1 FLR 565 confirms my point; and it represents the common – (judge-made) – law, which cannot be overturned by a rule-maker. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 6:54 am by Scott Bomboy
In 1994, Justice David Souter set the current Fair Use test in a decidedly adult case, Campbell v. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:10 am by Eugene Volokh
Lemley, Raizel Liebler, Barry McDonald, Tyler Ochoa, Aaron Perzanowski, Betsy Rosenblatt, Rebecca Tushnet, and David Welkowitz.) [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 4:28 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At Balkinization, Marty Lederman and David Luban weigh in on the government’s cert petition in Hargan v. [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 10:36 am by Marty Lederman
By Marty Lederman and David LubanThis coming Friday, the Supreme Court Justices are scheduled to consider, at conference, the government’s nominal “petition for certiorari” in No. 17-654, Hargan v. [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am by Ben
In the UK in FAPL v BT [2017] Mr Justice Arnold concluded that the High Court has the jurisdiction to make an order against an access provider that would require the ISP to block access not to a website but rather streaming servers giving unauthorised access to copyright content - 'live' blocking. [read post]
28 Dec 2017, 5:25 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Burke PC v Aezah 2017 NY Slip Op 32670(U) December 14, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 654778/2016 Judge: David B. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 5:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Section 8371.The Supreme Court adopted the two-part test enunciated in the case of Terletsky v. v. [read post]