Search for: "MATTER OF J L F H A F"
Results 81 - 100
of 600
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2022, 4:25 am
Id. at 19-20 (Tallman, J., dissenting). [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 10:25 pm
74-80 Çaliskan, Yusuf; Çaliskan, Zeynep “2 Temmuz 2019 Tarihli Yabanci Mahkeme Kararlarinin Taninmasi ve Tenfizine Iliskin Lahey Anlasmasinin Degerlendirilmesi”, Public and Private International Law Bulletin 40 (2020), pp 231-245 (available here) (An Evaluation of 2 July 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters) Cardoso, Connor J. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 2:09 pm
” The authors begin their analysis of specific causation with a brief acknowledgement that our legal system could abandon any effort to set standards or require rigorous thinking on the matter by simply leaving the matter to the jury.[9] After all, this laissez-faire approach had been the rule of law for centuries. [read post]
20 May 2022, 1:56 pm
L. [read post]
6 May 2022, 6:10 am
[Closing out Week Two of our FTC UMC Rulemaking symposium is a contribution from a very special guest: Commissioner Noah J. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 5:01 am
[I blogged an early draft of this essay three months ago, but I've revised it extensively since then. [read post]
20 Apr 2022, 3:14 am
74-80 Çaliskan, Yusuf; Çaliskan, Zeynep “2 Temmuz 2019 Tarihli Yabanci Mahkeme Kararlarinin Taninmasi ve Tenfizine Iliskin Lahey Anlasmasinin Degerlendirilmesi”, Public and Private International Law Bulletin 40 (2020), pp 231-245 (available here) (An Evaluation of 2 July 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters) Cardoso, Connor J. [read post]
16 Apr 2022, 9:05 pm
J. [read post]
1 Apr 2022, 3:04 pm
[I]f one adopts the increasingly prevalent view that antitrust must facilitate unfettered access to markets, thus spurring free entry and expansion by incumbent rivals, the Sherman Act goes from being a prophylactic device aimed at protecting consumers against welfare-reducing acts to being a misplaced regulatory tool that potentially sacrifices both consumer welfare and efficiency in a misguided pursuit of more of both. [read post]
27 Mar 2022, 4:50 pm
There was a post on the Privacy Matters blog. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 2:09 pm
David L. [read post]
9 Mar 2022, 4:08 pm
Christine F. [read post]
9 Feb 2022, 4:31 pm
L. [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 5:53 am
Portilla, David J. [read post]
27 Jan 2022, 8:00 pm
The Department also extended consular officers’ discretionary authority, on a case-by-case basis, to waive the in-person interview for certain H-2, F, M, and academic J visa applicants and applicants renewing any visa within 48 months of expiration of a visa in the same category. [read post]
21 Jan 2022, 3:15 am
I’m not going to set it all out here but the core part (from section 1) is this : (3) Behaviour is “abusive” if it consists of any of the following— (a) physical or sexual abuse; (b) violent or threatening behaviour; (c) controlling or coercive behaviour; (d) economic abuse (see subsection (4)); (e) psychological, emotional or other abuse; and it does not matter whether the behaviour consists of a single incident or a course of conduct. [read post]
9 Jan 2022, 2:12 pm
I then describe the FPPA in detail, but by pulling various pieces of the 34-page law together by subject matter. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 5:01 am
As my article notes, courts do make exceptions to the litigate-in-your-own-name rule, and there are plausible arguments that pseudonymous litigation should be more commonly allowed; but this is still a good articulation of the dominant view: Pilots X, Y, Z, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, & M sued Boeing about its 737 MAX airplanes. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 2:22 pm
Corp., 244 F. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 9:52 am
But if the court really wants to keep the plaintiff's identity secret, then the witness would have to be put under some sort of protective order to remain quiet about that identity as well.[8] Many people are likely to resist becoming witnesses if that means agreeing to a protective order, at least if they have no personal stake in the matter. [read post]
