Search for: "Smith v. Shaw" Results 81 - 100 of 108
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jul 2011, 9:20 am by Bexis
- New EDPA case requiring unsuccessful plaintiff to pay as costs  part of cost of complying with its ediscovery demands - Link.June 16, 2011:  It Should Be An Interesting Couple Of Weeks - Analysis of new Supreme Court Smith v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 2:57 pm by By Erik Lundegaard
Finally, Adriana Vesci, Scott Shaw and Reza Torkzadeh share with us the best advice they've received. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 8:51 am by Michelle Yeary
  There are many good aspects to the summary judgment ruling in Shaw v. [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 2:30 am by INFORRM
The Press’: the unmentioned ‘other problem’ with libel law” highlighting the case of Juliet Shaw, told under the title “A true story of Daily Mail lies“. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 5:00 am by Dennis Crouch
Snippets can be downloaded here: http://www.mbhb.com/snippets/bilski Topics include: Viewpoints on Life After Bilski v. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 3:37 am by sally
Supreme Court Agbaje v Akinnoye-Agbaje [2010] UKSC 13 (10 March 2010) RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Muller Gmbh & Company KG (UK Production) [2010] UKSC 14 (10 March 2010) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Chima v R [2010] EWCA Crim 416 (10 March 2010) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Steenberg & Anor v Enterprise Inns Plc & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 201 (10 March 2010) Smith, R (on the application of) v Land Registry… [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 9:46 pm
I am thankful to my friend Eugene White for drawing to my attention a recent case from the ACT where a solicitor, David Landers, had some difficulties in dealing with ACT authorities on behalf of his client, a teacher who wanted to retire and get a payout due to illness.Because of the significance of this decision, I have set out the judgment in full.DAVID LANDER v COUNCIL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY[2009] ACTSC 117 (11 September 2009)APPEAL - Appeal against… [read post]
23 May 2009, 3:43 am
Because AT&T's pension payments accord with a bona fide seniority system's terms, they are insulated from challenge under Title VII §703(h).o May 18, 2009 decision hereo SCOTUS docket hereo SCOTUSwiki hereo Noted here: Reuters; Connecticut Employment Law Blog; Yahoo; WAPO; Christian Science Monitor; Bloomberg; Shaw Valenza; NYTimes; FYI: Central Ohio Employment Law Update; Ross Runkel; Paul Mollica; SCOTUSblog (opinion recap); Fisher… [read post]