Search for: "Belt v. State"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,157
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Nov 2010, 7:26 am
Dorman Products, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 8:47 am
Supreme Court ruling, in the landmark case of Massachusetts v. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 7:22 am
The 6-3 ruling in Wyeth v. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 6:49 am
Mazda, in which the Court is considering whether federal safety regulations requiring car manufacturers to install either a lap belt or a lap/shoulder belt in certain seating positions preclude the family of an accident victim from claiming that, under state law, a manufacturer’s choice to install a lap belt was negligent. [read post]
7 Nov 2010, 6:32 pm
Specifically, do all seat belts have to have shoulder harnesses, or is a lap belt enough? [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 9:21 am
Buchanan emphasized that state tort law provided an incentive to exceed what were minimum standards, and he argued that Wyeth v. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 6:41 am
Dayco Products, LLC v. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 4:30 am
This case is particularly interesting because it will allow the Court to reconsider its decision in Geier v Honda (decided in 2000) in which the Court found that a state claim was impliedly preempted by the federal regulations that gave automobile manufacturers the choice to use either seat belts or air bags. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 3:10 am
Unsurprisingly, in my view, in the light of Lord Justice Nichols famous dictum in Lloyds Bank Plc v Rosset [1989] 1 Ch 350 (a case with many similar features): "There was, I repeat, physical presence on the property by the wife and her agent of the nature, and to the extent, that one would expect of an occupier having regard to the then state of the property: namely, the presence involved in actually carrying out the renovation necessary to make the house fit for residential… [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 3:10 am
Unsurprisingly, in my view, in the light of Lord Justice Nichols famous dictum in Lloyds Bank Plc v Rosset [1989] 1 Ch 350 (a case with many similar features): "There was, I repeat, physical presence on the property by the wife and her agent of the nature, and to the extent, that one would expect of an occupier having regard to the then state of the property: namely, the presence involved in actually carrying out the renovation necessary to make the house fit for residential… [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 5:51 am
Tinker v. [read post]
28 Oct 2010, 5:17 am
Accordingly, the lump sum payable by the husband was reduced to £7 million, on the basis that Mr Justice Charles had allowed the wife £1 million more than she actually required for her housing needs and her (capitalised) maintenance.In conclusion Lord Justice Ward stated:"They must both learn to tighten their belts but that they ought to have done years ago. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 10:10 am
Khajuria v. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 5:21 am
Years ago, the Supreme Court in Katz v. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 11:35 am
Seat belts have been effective in saving lives, but there are also studies which indicate that the very same seat belts increase the risk of whiplash injury or injury to the neck. [read post]
6 Oct 2010, 12:13 pm
Williamson v. [read post]
6 Oct 2010, 7:51 am
See, e.g., Welch v. [read post]
6 Oct 2010, 7:45 am
See, e.g., Welch v. [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 2:22 am
Law v Razer Industries Pty Limited [2010] FCA 1058 [read post]
