Search for: "Mead v. Roberts" Results 41 - 60 of 81
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jul 2019, 8:59 am by Richard Hunt
Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 121 S.Ct. 2164, 150 L.Ed.2d 292 (2001). [read post]
18 Apr 2009, 12:04 am
Roberts - 2 Pratik A. [read post]
24 Aug 2013, 8:00 am by Raffaela Wakeman
Wells and I spent the week up at Fort Meade, covering the 9/11 military commission pre-trial hearings. [read post]
3 Jul 2022, 7:15 am by Guest Author
When presented with an agency’s interpretation of a statute, the court uses Mead to decide which standard of review—Chevron or Skidmore—applies. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 4:47 am by Brian Cordery (Bristows)
In Optis v Apple, Meade J explained that the date of hand-down itself is not necessarily confidential. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 2:57 am
BSI Enterprises Ltd & Another v Blue Mountain Music Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1151, a Court of Appeal, England and Wales, ruling of 18 November 2015, is one of those decisions that looks as though it ought to be quite exciting because of its celebrity content but which actually has little or nothing to entertain the reader. [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 10:05 pm by Jeff Richardson
  Kensington this week introduced the Mead Collection Folios to give you an iPad case with the Trapper Keeper look. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 12:44 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  *************************   In a recent Delaware Chancery decision, Stacey Kotler v. [read post]
24 Mar 2024, 5:19 am by Frank Cranmer
Zoe Ingenhaag, Lexology: Gender critical beliefs in the workplace: on Phoenix v The Open University, Meade v Westminster City Council and Anor and Ali v Reason & Nott. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 9:35 am
As one newspaper reported, "in 2000, [AAA] Senior Vice President Robert Meade stated in an affidavit that the organization did not require its arbitrators to comply with that policy. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 3:06 pm
As one newspaper reported, "in 2000, [AAA] Senior Vice President Robert Meade stated in an affidavit that the organization did not require its arbitrators to comply with that policy. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 2:17 pm by Sam Murrant
David Mead, posting on the Strasbourg Observers blog, sees this case as a step back for Strasbourg – the case is inconsistent with precedent, including A v. [read post]