Search for: "Hart v. Hart"
Results 1001 - 1020
of 1,662
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Aug 2023, 6:30 am
A separate bill would eliminate the authority of the SEC to regulate shareholder proposals in their entirety, mirroring the objective of an ongoing lawsuit intervention by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) in National Center for Public Policy Research v. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 1:53 pm
For additional questions about TAM 201903017 and its impact on employee meal programs, please contact a member of Holland & Hart’s Benefits Law Group. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 3:33 pm
Sutphin, Holland & Hart, LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming.Date of Decision: March 14, 2012Facts: Appellant, Michael Beall, received preauthorization from the Wyoming Workers’ Safety and Compensation Division for an orchiectomy, a procedure to remove his left testicle, which he claimed was related to a workplace injury. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 10:04 am
Oakes = The Limitation of Charter Rights: Critical Essays on R. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 1:07 am
See David Hart QC’s commentary to this case here. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 8:52 am
Term Limits, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2011, 9:30 am
Schachter / Antonio Cassese.Oxford ; Portland, Or. : Hart, 2011.KZ3900 .F58 2011International TradeU.S. [read post]
16 Jan 2022, 4:22 pm
The first high-profile libel trial of 2022 began last week with Banks v Cadwalladr. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 11:28 am
As David Hart says in his post, the boundaries of the right to receive information are still being worked out at the moment. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 9:26 am
Dobson and others v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2011] EWHC 3253 – read judgment David Hart QC acted for the defendants in this case. [read post]
31 Jan 2014, 9:41 am
In almost the exact same case in the 3rd Circuit, Hart v. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 4:05 pm
Writing before the decision of the Court of Appeal in ZXC v Bloomberg LP [2020] EWCA Civ 611, Professor David Rolph commented in his illuminating chapter on the case in Landmark Cases in Defamation Law (Hart Publishing, 2019), ‘the policy of the law has decisively changed. [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:16 am
’ Since the Town Board left itself this latitude to identify additional areas in the future, the petitioner did not ‘establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan’ (Matter of Hart v Town Bd. of Town of Huntington, 114 AD3d at 683, quoting Infinity Consulting Group, Inc. v Town of Huntington, 49 AD3d at 814). [read post]
20 Nov 2017, 7:16 am
’ Since the Town Board left itself this latitude to identify additional areas in the future, the petitioner did not ‘establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan’ (Matter of Hart v Town Bd. of Town of Huntington, 114 AD3d at 683, quoting Infinity Consulting Group, Inc. v Town of Huntington, 49 AD3d at 814). [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 10:26 am
IMS Health, or Harris v. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 1:31 am
IPKat team blogger Darren's post on Nestec v Dualit ("Poisonous priority – how many ways can a patent be toxic?" [read post]
20 Oct 2022, 6:30 am
We observe in closing that in Dobbs v. [read post]
24 Oct 2017, 8:33 am
In this guest post, she shares her thoughts and updates us on the related developments.Pemetrexed pops up in MilanGuest Kat Eibhlin gives takes us through the recent decision handed down by the Court of Milan which forms part of the long running multi-jurisdictional battle concerning Eli Lilly's patent protecting its pemetrexed (Alimta) product.Medical data in a twist - Technomed v BluecrestGuest Kat Rosie demystifies database rights with the recent decision of Technomed v… [read post]
12 Aug 2024, 4:00 am
In Patchak v. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 11:13 am
. : Hart, 2010. [read post]
