Search for: "Hart v. Hart" Results 601 - 620 of 1,662
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Feb 2016, 12:30 am by Emily Prifogle
Williams's Defenders of the Unborn: The Pro-Life Movement before Roe v. [read post]
31 Jan 2016, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
, heard 15 January 2016 (Sir David Eady) Hiranandani-Vandrevala v Times Newspapers Limited, heard 20 January 2016 (Nicol J) Burrell v Clifford, heard 25 and 26 January 2016 (Richard Spearman QC) Lokhova v Tymula, heard 26 and 27 January 2016 (Dingemans J) Monks v National Westminster Bank plc heard 28 and 29 January 2016 (Sir David Eady). [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 9:15 am by Guest Blogger
  I hear them in the voice of my Constitutional Law professor, Robert Bork, and in the words of John Hart Ely, whose scholarly elaboration of the logic of Footnote Four in Democracy and Distrust posed the most cogent challenge to the Court’s expansive constitutional decisions in the realm of reproductive autonomy. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 11:48 am by Orin Kerr
And I wonder: If the Hartes had made their cause of action trespass rather than 42 U.S.C. 1983, should qualified immunity still apply given that there was no qualified immunity doctrine in cases like Entick v. [read post]
18 Jan 2016, 9:53 am by Elim
., The Law of Misstatements: 50 Years on from Hedley Byrne v Heller (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2015). [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 9:26 am by Robert B. Milligan
International Trade Secret and Non-Compete Law Update In the third installment, attorneys Wan Li, Ming Henderson and Daniel Hart focused on non-compete and trade secret considerations from an international perspective. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 1:09 pm by Elim
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD3930 .E58 2015Adam Tomkins & Paul Scott, eds., Entick v Carrington: 250 Years of the Rule of Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2015). [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 12:15 pm by Elim
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD530 .P83 v. 132John Baker, ed., Selected Readings and Commentaries on Magna Carta 1400-1604 (London: Seldon Society, 2015). [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 8:00 am by Jack Kennedy, Olswang LLP
They were: Rylands v Fletcher (1866) LR 3 HL 330 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256 Salomon v A Salomon & Co [1897] AC 22 Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562 Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions [1935] AC 462 Liversidge v Anderson [1942] AC 206 Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130 Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223 Anisminic… [read post]
11 Nov 2015, 2:03 pm by Mark Tushnet
(I think he made that observation in connection with some arguments around Cohen v. [read post]