Search for: "Person v. Commissioner of Social Security"
Results 481 - 500
of 680
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Apr 2019, 6:50 am
In Barrick Gold Corp. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 2:56 am
On the same day, there were hearings in the cases of 2 Wakefield Limited v Persons Unknown, Clarke v Rose and Wolverhampton City Council v Kevin Poole. [read post]
28 May 2024, 11:38 am
Internet and Social Media The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has concluded its investigation into Snap, Inc’s launch of the ‘My AI’ chatbot. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 8:59 am
Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc., [2008] 3 SCR 265 At the outset, it is appropriate to refer to the words of Judson J. for this Court in Commissioner of Patents v. [read post]
13 May 2012, 2:02 pm
The Commissioner’s report on the matter will be presented to Parliament next week. [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 7:46 am
" New York Times v. [read post]
14 Jul 2015, 8:13 pm
Nursing Home v. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:55 am
Some social problems have been around for a long time. [read post]
17 Apr 2023, 5:50 am
The Federal Court has issued a permanent injunction against social media influencer, ASX Wolf, who gives financial advice to paid subscribers. [read post]
28 Mar 2021, 4:41 pm
Data Privacy in Social Media Platform: Issues and Challenges, Sakshi Rewaria, Galgotias University, School of Law, Students. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 4:15 pm
Internet and Social Media The Centre for Internet and Society blog has published an analysis of Peiter “Mudge” Zatko’s whistleblower complaint with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, filed in July 2022, which accuses the platform of serious security failings. [read post]
19 Jun 2023, 2:00 am
On Friday 16 June 2023 there was a pre-trial review the case of Zhurba v Person(s) Unknown before Nicklin J. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 6:05 am
” Kansas v. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 3:26 am
The Court of Appeals held that that the irrebuttable presumption mandating that an indigent, non-custodial parent be ordered to pay a minimum of $25 per month in child support contravened the Federal Child Support Enforcement Act Social Security Act, Title IV-D §467(b)(2), as amended, 42 USCA §667(b)(2), thus violating the constitutional principle of Federal preemption. [read post]
21 Jun 2020, 7:11 am
Nyanzi v. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 2:03 am
The tribunal reversed a fine imposed on Clearview AI, a facial image database service, on the basis that the (UK) GDPR did not apply to the processing of personal data by the company. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 4:02 pm
This week a French data protection authority gave Facebook three months to stop tracking non-users’ web activity without their consent and ordered the social network to stop some transfers of personal data to the United States. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
