Search for: "US v. Shah" Results 81 - 100 of 359
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Nov 2014, 6:16 am by Lucy Hayes, Olswang LLP
 Beatson LJ held that there is no requirement for the joint tortfeasor to be proximate in time and place when the tort is carried out (Shah v Gale [2005] EWHC 1087 (QB)). [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 5:58 am by Sarah Milsted, Olswang LLP
The trial judge held that he was bound by the Court of Appeal decisions in Ul-Haq v Shah (2009) and Widlake v BAA Limited (2009). [read post]
24 Dec 2023, 6:34 am by Just Security
Elections Paras Shah (@pshah518) interview with Allison Mollenkamp The Just Security Podcast: Can the World Move Away from Fossil Fuels? [read post]
11 Mar 2022, 4:02 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Payments to a third party can be used to show performance in a breach of contract action (see Shah v Exxis, Inc., 138 AD3d 970, 972-973). [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 9:01 am by Just Security
Later today the Just Security podcast, with host Paras Shah, will feature Professors Oona Hathaway, Adil Haque, and Yuval Shany discussing the case. [read post]
22 Jul 2023, 7:51 am by Just Security
Guantanamo Biden Must Act on Landmark UN Special Rapporteur Guantanamo Report by Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) Cyber Bugs in the Software Liability Debate by Chinmayi Sharma and John Speed Meyers Social Media Content Regulation / First Amendment Missouri v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 6:54 pm by Schachtman
Supp. 2d 1345, 1367 (S.D.Fla.2011), aff’d, Chapman v. [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 2:03 am by INFORRM
PNM v Times Newspapers, heard 17 and 18 January 2017 (UK Supreme Court) Guise v Shah, heard 2-3, 5, 8 and 11 May 2017 (Dingemans J) [read post]
10 Apr 2018, 1:45 pm by Zarine Kharazian
For the IELR Blog’s past coverage of the U.S. v Microsoft case, see here. [read post]
10 Apr 2018, 1:45 pm by Zarine Kharazian
For the IELR Blog’s past coverage of the U.S. v Microsoft case, see here. [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 5:23 am by Schachtman
Ruskin acknowledges, the case of Weitz & Luxenberg v. [read post]