Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 7001 - 7020
of 15,316
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2015, 3:33 am
” That’s how the Maryland Court of Appeals — that state’s highest court — in Bontempo v Lares, 444 Md. 344 [2015], recently referred to the remedy of judicial dissolution made available by statute in most states, including New York, to oppressed minority shareholders of closely held corporations. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 1:00 am
R (C) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 26 October 2015. [read post]
6 Dec 2015, 2:51 pm
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) filed another petition for a writ of habeas corpus (available of NhRP’s website) to: a) require Respondents to justify their detention of a chimpanzee named Tommy, b) order Tommy’s immediate discharge, and c) order Tommy’s transfer to an appropriate primate sanctuary, which the NhRP suggests is Save the Chimps. [read post]
4 Dec 2015, 6:14 am
. . . .B. agreed.State v. [read post]
4 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
Exhibit A: The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Chevron v. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 12:25 pm
It asks (1) whether the Louisiana courts erred in failing to find that the state’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence violated its obligation under Brady v. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 6:00 am
In 1876, lawyer and legal publisher Carl Jahn published the first issue of the Weekly Cincinnati Law Bulletin, a precursor of the Ohio State Bar Journal, and solicited Ohio lawyers to submit “law points of general interest. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 3:43 am
Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997), and Ortiz v. [read post]
Creating circuit split, 11th Circuit finds ADEA authorizes disparate impact claims by job applicants
2 Dec 2015, 6:10 am
Since Reeb v. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 4:04 am
Eventually, in Stone v. [read post]
28 Nov 2015, 9:16 pm
They all lack one of the fundamental hallmarks of formal validity;(c) there is no express revocation of the deceased's Will. [read post]
25 Nov 2015, 8:14 am
But jurors are still deliberating in the "Facebook" murder trial of State v. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 8:17 pm
§ 332(c)(7)(B) (the “TCA”), asserting that the Town’s denial of its application amounted to an effective prohibition of wireless services and that the Town’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 2:12 pm
What, from PORTO's point of view, is there to be lost or needs to be protected? [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 8:18 am
This decision was keenly-awaited since it was the first interpretation of the CJEU's ruling in January 2014 in Case C-355-12 Nintendo v PC Box [on which see Katpost here and links to earlier comments; one R Black appeared for Nintendo in this reference ...] on the effectiveness of TPMs and enforceability of rights against those who seek to circumvent them. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 9:57 pm
Plaintiff’s contention that he is entitled to the stated replacement cost loss recovery purely by reason of his having maintained a “replacement loss” policy is without merit. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 8:44 pm
Mental Hygiene Law §81.07(g)(1)(v). [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 2:31 pm
It’s clearly possible to exceed authorized access but not access without authorization, see 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B) (prohibiting the latter but not the former); United States v. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 11:14 am
Chief among LabMD’s defenses were: (a) the FTC lacked jurisdiction over the case, (b) the FTC lacked statutory authority under Section 5 to regulate data security, (c) the FTC’s complaint was unconstitutional and (c) LabMD’s customers did not suffer any substantial harm. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 9:27 am
The study concludes that “[s]ince robots could not have the mental state to commit an underlying crime, command responsibility would never be available in situations involving these weapons. [read post]
