Search for: "Doe and Does I-V" Results 41 - 60 of 69,266
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jun 2024, 3:37 am by Peter J. Sluka
    I wonder if the Court of Appeals’ belt-tightening with respect to the internal affairs doctrine may temper that preference, if only slightly. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Secondly, the court considered that, while no previous case has directly answered the question raised by the appeal, the cases of Bulman & Dickson v Fenwick & Co [1894] 1 QB 179 and Reardon Smith Line Ltd v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1963] AC 691 provided strong implicit support for MUR’s case. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 8:18 pm by Stephen Halbrook
"  It adds: "A bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 4:16 pm by INFORRM
The issues before the court were (i) whether a claimant is required to demonstrate financial loss to establish liability under s3(1) of the Defamation Act 1952 in a claim for malicious falsehood; and (ii) whether a claimant who establishes liability can recover damages for injury to feelings arising from the falsehood, even where no financial loss occurred. [read post]
16 Jun 2024, 10:02 am by Eleonora Rosati
In this sense, decisions like those of the US Copyright Office in Zarya of the Dawn [IPKat here] and the Beijing Internet Court in Li v Liu [IPKat here] are helpful. [read post]
15 Jun 2024, 8:05 pm by Josh Blackman
For example, I think she backed off her vote in Roman Catholic Diocese after incessant "shadow docket" criticism, as evident in Does v. [read post]
14 Jun 2024, 1:05 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Jarkesy, Murthy, and Fischer, and I would be surprised if Kavanaugh does not take Ohio v. [read post]
14 Jun 2024, 11:36 am by Eric Goldman
I vigorously disagree with both rulings, and I wonder if they will survive the inevitable appeals. [read post]