Search for: "Alls v. Alls" Results 521 - 540 of 190,857
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Sep 2024, 10:11 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Had all this happened in the state prison system, there would be a claim under state law, pursuant to Section 1983, which allows you to sue state and local officials for constitutional violations. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 9:58 am by Dylan Gibbs
That’s all for today. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 9:47 am by Asude Sena Moya
Through this post you can have a better understanding of reproduction under copyright and related rights, quotation and pastiche, artists’ contracts and internet piracy as well as the Creation Records case.Artificial IntelligenceAntonios Baris discussed the decision in Arijit Singh v. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 9:00 am by Jack Goldsmith
Supreme Court in support of the unsuccessful petition for certiorari in Edgar v. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  Representative democracy, like all systems of government, can hinder or facilitate collective action. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 5:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Violation of Company Policy Leads to Termination of Bank Vice President The case of Arora v ICICI Bank of Canada provides an excellent illustration of how to determine whether one is a fiduciary employee of their employer. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 5:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
Violation of Company Policy Leads to Termination of Bank Vice President The case of Arora v ICICI Bank of Canada provides an excellent illustration of how to determine whether one is a fiduciary employee of their employer. [read post]
4 Sep 2024, 4:00 am by Robert McKay
V-Lex itself has been rumoured to be a venture capital-backed acquisition target for Harvey.ai, apparently in order to use v-Lex to “train” Harvey. [read post]
3 Sep 2024, 6:19 pm by Kurt R. Karst
By Véronique Li, Senior Medical Device Regulation Expert & Jeffrey N. [read post]
On October 1, 2022, the court vacated the 2021 guidance and issued a declaratory judgment that the guidance was unlawful on several grounds, holding that it: (1) was contrary to law because Title VII, even after the Supreme Court’s decision in Bostock v. [read post]