Search for: "Phillips v. Weeks" Results 761 - 780 of 818
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
One need look no further than last week’s sentencing of Samuel Bankman-Fried to see the impact of noncompliance.[12] In advance of the sentencing, the Department of Justice filed hundreds of victim statements with the court.[13] The victim statements reflect the incredibly broad cross-section of people who were harmed by the fraud that Bankman-Fried was convicted of: single parents, retirees, young people, grandparents. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 4:00 am
; Work Matters; Law.comArgued Awaiting Decision14 Penn Plaza LLC v. [read post]
2 Dec 2018, 2:49 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
[emphasis added] The rationale for resisting this special position was enunciated by Justice Parrett in Phillips v. [read post]
26 Mar 2013, 5:06 pm by INFORRM
Exemplary Damages and Article 10 (again) Second, there is the argument, referred to by Gill Phillips on this blog last week and repeated by Lord Black in his speech, that exemplary damages are contrary to Article 10. [read post]
30 May 2016, 9:02 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
And even though he would never fire a male employee based on attractiveness, this, somehow, is not sex discrimination.The Story of Her NightIn a recent case, Edwards v. [read post]
8 Aug 2022, 3:00 am by Chip Merlin
Regarding contenders, best of luck to Merlin Law Group attorneys Mike Duffy and Christina Phillips, who are trying a case in Wisconsin this week. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 9:57 pm
You might be noticing a pattern here with Blizzard games, a company that might be compared with Phillip Morris soon enough. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  That was the organization, in 2003, of a week-long symposium, running literally morning, noon, and night, on the general theme of “From Text to Performance: Law and Other Performing Arts. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 9:52 am by Phil Dixon
Judges Inman and Griffin concurred. (1) Victim’s statements regarding identity of attacker were admissible as excited utterances despite possible passage of time between attack and statements; (2) Sixth Amendment confrontation argument not raised during trial was waived on appeal notwithstanding pretrial motion; (3) No abuse of discretion or prejudicial error in admission of testimony identifying defendant on a jail phone call and interpreting the contents of the call State v. [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 12:49 am by CMS
Today’s live blog team comprises Kenneth Rose, Stephen Phillips, Rory Thomson, Morag McClelland, Shona McCusker, Sian McNiff, Tobias Seger and Emma Boffey, all from CMS Scotland. 1604: That ends proceedings for today. [read post]