Search for: "STATE v FIELD"
Results 5221 - 5240
of 12,942
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 May 2010, 5:38 am
By reference to Article 8(2), disclosure must be in accordance within the law, it must be necessary in a democratic society and proportionate and it must be for a stated and legitimate purpose Records will usually be disclosed For guidance, Mr Justice Llyod Jones looked to the case of A Health Authority v X and others [2001] EWCA Civ 2014. [read post]
18 Feb 2018, 10:36 am
The closest analogy for Mueller’s decision to charge the Russian trolls is probably the May 2014 indictment in United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 2:31 pm
Gynecologists pushed women out of the field of reproductive health by lobbying state legislatures to ban midwifery and prohibit abortions. [read post]
10 Jan 2018, 1:31 pm
Husted v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 11:41 pm
Gore and State Farm v. [read post]
12 Jun 2024, 1:12 pm
State v. [read post]
24 Mar 2007, 11:12 am
The Civil War, rather than the founding - rather than Marbury v. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 5:08 pm
AmSouth Bancorporation v. [read post]
29 Apr 2012, 1:34 pm
India has had its fair share of representatives at the ICJ; being one of twelve states with three of more judges at the Peace Palace. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 5:36 am
State v. [read post]
28 May 2020, 10:00 am
Forescout v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 10:03 am
The ruling in District Attorney's Office v. [read post]
25 May 2010, 10:11 am
Skinner's attorneys Harold Comer and Kenneth Fields chosen to do so. [read post]
14 Jun 2014, 10:46 am
The case of Kinlin v. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 12:04 pm
In People v. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 6:30 am
By the time the case reached the Supreme Court, the Texas law had closed half the abortion clinics in the state. [read post]
2 May 2016, 11:26 am
The Court’s agreement to rule on the SCA Hygiene Products case makes that something of a sequel in the patent field to a 2014 ruling by the Justices on copyright law — the six-to-three ruling in Petrella v. [read post]
16 Sep 2008, 4:35 am
Cir. 2000), in which we stated that the purpose of the written description requirement is to "ensure that the scope of the right to exclude, as set forth in the claims, does not overreach the scope of the inventor's contribution to the field of art as described in the patent specification," id. at 1345. [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 8:31 am
Also, while it's a different field of law and a different jurisdiction, I've meanwhile read the 130-page European Commission decision on what the EU says is "state aid" Ireland gave to Apple, and I'll comment on it soon. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 6:30 am
State, 9 Tenn. 228 (1829). [read post]
