Search for: "United States v. Place" Results 6581 - 6600 of 24,125
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Mar 2019, 1:05 pm by Patricia Hughes
It provides a shield for individuals from arbitrary state action. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:38 am by FHH Law
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Public File Reports – All radio and television station employment units with five (5) or more full-time employees located in Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas must place EEO Public File Reports in their public inspection files. [read post]
The Court of Appeal had held that the evidence emerging during the de Silva review had not been sufficient to revive (in accordance with Brecknell v United Kingdom (32457/04) (2008) 46 EHRR 42, [2007]) the art 2 procedural or investigative obligation. [read post]
Mrs Finucane objected strenuously to the proposal that the inquiry would take place under the new legislation and a number of discussions as to the terms of the inquiry took place over the years that followed. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 3:00 am by Will Baude
States draw the law/equity line in different places, they date the right to different years, and they make different kinds of practical exceptions. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 7:18 pm by Mike Danko
” The United States Supreme Court discussed the “discretionary function defense” in a case called United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 7:18 pm by Mike Danko
” The United States Supreme Court discussed the “discretionary function defense” in a case called United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 5:20 am
, Chandler v Cape plc [2012] EWCA Civ 525.Tort, however, can be understood in two senses here. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 1:29 pm by Scott R. Anderson
The Supreme Court affirmed as much in its 2015 decision in Zivotofsky v. [read post]
22 Mar 2019, 2:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
The FSIA gives foreign sovereign governments presumptive immunity from suit, subject to several statutory exceptions, including an exception for actions based on commercial activity with a sufficient nexus with the United States. [read post]
  Moreover, in Burke v United Kingdom (App No.19807/0) 11 July 2006, the argument that there was insufficient protection of art 2 rights because a doctor might decide to withdraw CANH without being under an obligation to obtain the approval of the court was expressly rejected. [read post]