Search for: "HARMS v. HARMS"
Results 7101 - 7120
of 36,791
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Aug 2014, 5:37 am
" State v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 11:12 am
Any substantial harm caused to an individual as a result of a failure to implement adequate security measures can cause a fine of up to 1000 MCIs ($11,300) and prison terms of up to three years, increasing to 2000 MCIs ($22,600) and five years' imprisonment if committed by a government official or business executive. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 5:47 am
") AC36567 - State v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The exhaustion of administrative remedies rule, however, "is not inflexible and need not be followed where an agency's action is challenged as either unconstitutional or wholly beyond its grant of power" [see Watergate II Apartments v Buffalo Sewer, 46 NY2d 52] or where it is alleged that the administrative agency or process followed by the administrative agency violates the individual's constitutional rights to due process [see Levine v Board of Education, 173… [read post]
28 May 2019, 6:18 am
Convicted inmates who sue the jail for lousy medical treatment have to prove the defendants acted with subjective intent to harm the plaintiffs. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 5:32 am
Dukes and Comcast Corp. v. [read post]
30 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The exhaustion of administrative remedies rule, however, "is not inflexible and need not be followed where an agency's action is challenged as either unconstitutional or wholly beyond its grant of power" [see Watergate II Apartments v Buffalo Sewer, 46 NY2d 52] or where it is alleged that the administrative agency or process followed by the administrative agency violates the individual's constitutional rights to due process [see Levine v Board of Education, 173… [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 4:42 am
See, Smith v. [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 7:17 am
[Live commentary on the Supreme Court oral argument in FDA v. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 7:42 am
Case citation: Patel v. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 6:33 am
Baze v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 3:00 am
It is sufficient that harm in the abstract could reasonably be foreseen. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 1:45 pm
” To read all of Richards’ comments, visit concurringopinions.com/archives/2011/03/a-few-preliminary-thoughts-on-snyder-v-phelps.html. [read post]
17 Aug 2010, 7:30 pm
Calder applied here because McNamee knew Clemens lived (and at the time worked) in Texas, knew the harm would be felt in Texas, knew SI would be read in Texas, and knew the effects to Clemens' reputation would be felt in Texas. [read post]
8 Mar 2012, 10:00 am
Bensaid v. the United Kingdom (Application no. 44599/98, Feb. 6, 2001). [read post]
6 Jan 2012, 1:30 pm
Data Breach Litigation Two of the most notable decisions related to the evolving theories of standing and harm were in the Claridge v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 10:23 am
Defendant in the case of M.A.M. v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 10:23 am
Defendant in the case of M.A.M. v. [read post]
