Search for: "In re James R. (1978)"
Results 61 - 80
of 85
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Apr 2011, 3:48 pm
James L. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 7:05 pm
Without reform of the rules regarding jurisdictional choice the US is losing an opportunity to exploit the edge in international competition it might get from its federal system.Recent Developments to Promote Transparency and Public Participation in Investment Treaty Arbitration James Harrison Abstract: In the past, concerns have been expressed about the secrecy of international treaty arbitration. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 12:54 pm
Res. [read post]
28 Sep 2021, 4:25 pm
In the third case, In re His Royal Highness the Duke of Windsor (Deceased) [2017] EWHC 2887 (Fam), an application to unseal the will of Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor, was made by the Librarian and Assistant Keeper of the Queen’s Archives, and was granted by the then President, Sir James Munby, for the sole purposes of those archives and to no one else. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 10:05 am
According to “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” (1978), by journalist Howard Fields, Doar seemed driven less by a sense of urgency than by a passion for exhaustiveness. [read post]
1 May 2010, 1:16 pm
The land we're on for the trailer, we're about six or eight months behind. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 2:11 pm
Appellant Mitzi Renfroe is James Robert Neese's mother, and the remaining appellants are James Robert Neese's children. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 5:17 am
They’re all, in different ways, not serving him. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
[i] The Court re-affirmed these principles stating the following: The Copyright Act strikes “a balance between promoting the public interest in the encouragement and dissemination of works of the arts and intellect and obtaining a just reward for the creator… It seeks to ensure that an author will reap the benefits of his efforts, in order to incentivize the creation of new works. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 10:35 am
Is it reasonable that he’s afraid of them because they’re a black male outside wearing a baseball cap that happens to be red? [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 1:37 pm
., 179 P.3d 905, 914 (Cal. 2008) (“[r]equiring manufacturers to warn their products’ users in all instances would place an onerous burden on them and would invite mass consumer disregard and ultimate contempt for the warning process”); Thompson v. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 4:26 pm
In the following guest post, John Reed Stark, President of John Reed Stark Consulting and former Chief of the SEC’s Office of Internet Enforcement, sorts out the issues involved in the battle between Apple and the government, in light of all the circumstances, including the February 29, 2016 opinion by Eastern District of New York Judge James Orenstein in the separate Apple iPhone unlocking case. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 1:09 pm
Aug. 12, 2021) (quoting In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955)). [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 10:32 am
”1 But what about the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.2 It was not until 1978, in Penn Central Transp. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am
Today, for reasons both technological and political, there is an increasing divergence and growing conflict between U.S. and foreign laws that compel, and prohibit, production of data in response to governmental surveillance directives.[1][2] Major U.S. telecommunications and Internet providers[3] face escalating pressure from foreign governments, asserting foreign law, to require production of data stored by the providers in the United States, in ways that violate U.S. law.[4] At the… [read post]
6 Feb 2008, 11:51 am
Who, James Bond, Species, Highlander, and Stargate. [read post]
19 Apr 2019, 5:59 am
After the passage of the ICWA in 1978, New York amended section 39 of the Social Services Law and promulgated state regulations (see 18 NYCRR 431.18) to comply with federal standards. [read post]
14 Aug 2011, 9:11 am
Merrell challenged Swan’s unpublished, non-peer-reviewed re-analyses as not “generally accepted” under the Frye test. [read post]
30 Dec 2018, 3:03 am
" The appellate court said that as it stood, Cox wasn't entitled to rely on safe harbor because it did very little (if anything) even when told about repeat offenders, re-affirming the jury decision that sided with BMG and awarded $25 million against Cox when they found the broadband carrier liable for piracy by its subscribers, even if over turning that decision. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:09 am
., Defendant.No. 07-CV-95-LRR.Feb. 9, 2010.ORDERLINDA R. [read post]
