Search for: "HARMS v. HARMS"
Results 6001 - 6020
of 36,771
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Nov 2021, 7:46 am
On October 28, 2021, in a 2-1 split panel decision, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated its prior opinion in Hunstein v. [read post]
13 Aug 2012, 7:15 pm
In Krumpelbeck v. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 1:14 pm
LLC v. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 2:00 am
It may have caused no harm. [read post]
28 May 2020, 2:28 pm
The basic idea is that platforms should improve their systems for reducing online harms. [read post]
26 Apr 2016, 6:19 am
Smith v. [read post]
16 Apr 2015, 3:31 pm
" Actual harm to the child need not result for criminal liability; it is "sufficient that the defendant act in a manner which is likely to result in harm to the child, knowing of the likelihood of such harm coming to the child" (People v Simmons, 92 NY2d 829, 830 [emphasis added]). [read post]
30 May 2008, 7:00 am
Bratton v. [read post]
13 Jan 2023, 5:55 am
Miami Beach v McGraw, 158 AD3d 494, 496 [1st Dept 2018]). [read post]
14 Dec 2022, 8:02 pm
” Zlotnick v. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 3:24 am
Yemshaw (Appellant) v London Borough of Hounslow (Respondent) [2011] UKSC 3 – Read judgment / press summary The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that “domestic violence” in section 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 includes physical violence, threatening or intimidating behaviour and any other form of abuse which, directly or indirectly, may give rise to the risk of harm. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 9:54 am
Costco Wholesale Corp. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2021, 6:39 am
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
2 Jun 2017, 7:27 pm
” Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Boumediene v. [read post]
23 Nov 2009, 7:38 am
Co. v. [read post]
25 Apr 2021, 1:42 pm
Supreme Court decision Brady v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 5:12 pm
An injunction was granted in that case because of the real and strong possibility of serious physical harm and death, however Eady J held that the jurisdiction was not confined but was available “wherever necessary and proportionate, for the protection of Convention rights, whether of children or adults” [18] The judge referred to the cases of X (formerly Bell) v O’Brien [2003] EWHC 1101 (QB) and Carr v News Group Newspapers Ltd ([2005] EWHC 971… [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:52 pm
"Judge Callahan holds, however, that there's precisely such “clearly irreconcilable” intervening authority: Sorrell v. [read post]
21 Mar 2013, 9:49 am
Compare Righthaven v. [read post]
20 Mar 2022, 8:47 am
The court concludes: Defendants engaged in acts or omissions in Virginia that caused tortious harm (plaintiff’s servers were located in Virginia). [read post]
