Search for: "People v. Tooks" Results 6601 - 6620 of 12,167
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jan 2015, 7:26 am by Eduardo Ustaran
The debate is far from over but we should reflect about the intentions of the Court and consider how every activity involving personal information affects people’s privacy, regardless of how reasonable or necessary the purposes of that activity may be. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:14 am by Kevin LaCroix
As discussed here, in Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi, v. [read post]
4 Jan 2015, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
Considerations of the possible impact of the Act on cases such as Dabrowski v Greeuw may reinforce those views. [read post]
4 Jan 2015, 7:48 am by Jeremy Saland
It is worth (and actually critical) to note that the Second Department’s decision in Matter of Luis C declined to follow the holding of the First Department in People v. [read post]
3 Jan 2015, 9:56 am by Giles Peaker
Enfield’s formal consultation took place between 2 January 2014 to 28 February 2014, about 8 weeks. [read post]
2 Jan 2015, 8:51 am by Lyle Denniston
  Reasonable people can debate whether the ruling in this case was correct and who it binds. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 11:26 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Relying on precedent finding that internet communications are not confidential (see People v. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am by Ben
Supreme Court took up a related case in April. [read post]
26 Dec 2014, 3:24 am
Not content with taking the tune, the British took Händel as well and then anglicised him by removing his umlaut. [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 7:27 pm
Today, Cuba is still governed by the Castros and the Communist Party that came to power half a century ago.Neither the American, nor Cuban people are well served by a rigid policy that is rooted in events that took place before most of us were born. [read post]