Search for: "US v. Bridges" Results 521 - 540 of 2,454
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jun 2018, 2:23 pm
And they often permitted the lucky recipient the exclusive right to do very ordinary things, like operate a toll bridge or run a tavern. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 4:57 pm by INFORRM
The natural and ordinary meaning Citing Lord Bridge in Charleston v News Group Newspapers [1995] 2 AC 65, Master Bell emphasised that in order to determine the natural and ordinary meaning of the words of which a plaintiff complains, one must consider the context in which the words were used and the mode of publication [8]. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 7:00 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
That's a sham.To illustrate this truism perfectly, just read the relatively short injunction opinion in Polymet Corp. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 12:13 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
“But you can’t explain the whole law of eminent domain to your bridge opponents. [read post]
30 Sep 2018, 8:48 pm
 Turning first to the plain language of the statute, the court found MCALA to generally require a person to have a license whenever he does business as a collection agency in the State, which MCALA defined in BR § 7-101(d):(d) “Collection agency” means a person who engages directly or indirectly in the business of:   (1)(i) collecting for, or soliciting from another, a consumer claim; or  (ii)… [read post]