Search for: "Harris v. Royal" Results 41 - 60 of 149
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2018, 8:12 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
– perhaps caught up in the pageantry of Prince Harry’s royal wedding to American Meghan Markle over the weekend). [read post]
19 Dec 2017, 12:10 pm by Vanessa Sauter
Catherine Padhi discussed why a new cert petition in Attias v. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 11:50 am by Wolfgang Demino
See image of Trustee's Deed recorded in the Harris County Clerk's Office below: FIRST THE DUNNING, THEN THE DEED Section 1692e(5) prohibits threatening to take any action that cannot legally be taken, while  Section 1692e(2) prohibits falsely representing . . . the character, amount, or legal status of any debt. [read post]
7 Jul 2017, 1:34 pm by Donna Sokol
This is a guest post by Jeff Harris, Presidential Management Fellow. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 3:01 pm
(Pix © Larry Catá Backer 2016) I will be teaching a course on Corporate Social Responsibility. [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 12:25 am by INFORRM
In the Press Gazette Max Mosley has said that his family’s charity has enough money to fund Royal Charter backed press regulator IMPRESS until 2026. [read post]
7 Sep 2016, 7:22 am by Edith Roberts
” In Prawfsblog, Jack Preis discusses Manuel v. [read post]
26 Feb 2016, 11:24 am by Zack Bluestone
” During the hearing, Admiral Harry Harris testified that “China is clearly militarizing the South China Sea, and you’d have to believe in flat earth to think otherwise. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
Evan Harris also condemned these changes as “all “press release” and no “press regulation,” and questioned why IPSO did not consult the public over these changes “and instead negotiated in secret with a secretive industry body. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 7:25 am by Lawfare Staff
Admiral Harry Harris’s assertion last week that the United States would “clearly defend [the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands] if they are attacked by China. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am by Ben
In Europe, The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the consent of a copyright holder does not cover the distribution of an object incorporating a work where that object has been altered after its initial marketing to such an extent that it constitutes a new reproduction of that work (Case C‑419/13, Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright) with Eleonora opining that the decision means that that there is no such thing as a general principle of… [read post]