Search for: "Richardson v. Persons" Results 61 - 80 of 679
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jun 2022, 3:14 pm
Or, at a minimum, doesn't establish the requisite proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) to a categorical extent.I get why Justice Ramirez would think that a person who said "Shoot him" was indeed in a leadership position and hence a major participant. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 10:32 am by Roger Parloff
  Potential Blanket Legal Barriers Here is the text of Section 3: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any S [read post]
2 May 2022, 2:12 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Emotional distress damages are not recoverable in a private action to enforce the disability discrimination and accommodation requirements of either the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Rehab Act”) or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) according to the May 1, 2022 United States Supreme Court ruling in Cummings v. [read post]
2 Mar 2022, 4:59 am by Eric Segall
Richardson, where the Court did not allow plaintiffs to litigate for the public good. [read post]
6 Feb 2022, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
Media Law in Other Jurisdictions Australia A District Court of South Australia has granted a pre-action discovery to identify a person behind an anonymous WeChat account, to allow the prospective plaintiff to bring a claim for defamation, Yu v Yong [2022] SADC 10. [read post]
16 Jan 2022, 6:25 am by Richard Hunt
Richardson, 418 U.S. 166, 176–77 (1974). [read post]
29 Dec 2021, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
Mother informed Richardson that she would not allow her into the home absent a court order…. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 8:44 am by Eugene Volokh
Courts do often say that "we allow parties to use pseudonyms in the 'unusual case' when nondisclosure of the party's identity 'is necessary . . . to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment.'"[19] But there is nothing "unusual" about em­­barrassment or risk of harassment, reputational injury, or ridicule stemming from people believing the allegations in a case, or being wary about a… [read post]
27 Nov 2021, 2:24 am by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
A researcher applies personal choices when deciding to address a given problem. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 8:26 pm by David Kopel
This post surveys the pro/con social science evidence presented in the amicus briefs in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]