Search for: "People v Smith"
Results 681 - 700
of 3,465
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 May 2013, 5:04 pm
In 2000 Mance L.J. said in Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland: “Copyright does not lie on the same continuum as, nor is it the antithesis of, freedom of expression. [read post]
31 Jul 2016, 9:06 am
Related Cases: Smith v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 12:11 pm
This post is from the non-Reed Smith side of the blog only. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 7:05 am
Adler v. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 12:00 am
NY - PEOPLE v. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 3:23 am
For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. [read post]
24 Jan 2008, 10:56 am
Judge Paez, of all people. [read post]
24 Sep 2009, 11:22 am
Especially when it's a rich dude getting completely off when people with far less influence and resources rot away. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 1:02 pm
But it has its downsides when it comes to the en banc vote, since it's not only people like me who can recognize a panel's particular tilt. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 8:17 am
Brad Smith ofMicrosoftIncreasingly global: Brad Smith of Microsoft commented that US is important market but only 4% of world's population live in the US. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
So one might think, but in the 2015 case of Glossip v. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 11:58 am
As well as what we should expect.Beyond this larger point, I did want to make one other particularized critique of Judge Smith's view -- or, perhaps more accurately, of the FLSA (depending on whether or not you think that Judge Smith's done the right thing here, which I think most people would).Judge Smith's holding is based upon the intuition that since the nurses prefer this regime, and since it was done for their benefit, the FLSA time-and-a-half… [read post]
14 Nov 2009, 1:24 pm
People v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 6:24 am
People v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 2:26 pm
Smith largely repudiated the method of analysis used in prior free exercise cases like Wisconsin v. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 6:29 am
First, although the court might purport to restore the pre-Smith compelling interest test, as Congress did when it reinstated the 1963 rule of Sherbert v. [read post]
22 Feb 2009, 9:00 pm
Tucker v. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 9:15 am
The wackiness of Watson is not the result but the reasoning: Watson distinguishes rather than overrules Smith v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 1:45 pm
Arnold of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Does adultery affect my divorce case? [read post]
20 Sep 2013, 5:03 am
U.S. v. [read post]
