Search for: "People v. Speaks" Results 1101 - 1120 of 9,887
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2011, 2:10 pm by Lawrence Solum
When individuals pool their resources and speak under the legal fiction of a corporation, they do not lose their rights. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 9:54 am by Eric Goldman
As you recall, in December, a federal district court enjoined most of HB 20, Texas’ so-called “social media censorship” law. [read post]
11 Mar 2019, 5:00 am by John Jascob
Speaking directly to the institutional investor issues presented by corporate political spending, Raskin said: "If most company shares are owned by entities forbidden to be involved in politics, the CEO literally has no one to speak for. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 12:33 pm by Steven M. Gursten
Steve speaks and writes extensively on Kreiner and Michigan’s No-Fault laws and he is available for comment on Michigan’s new auto accident law, McCormick v. [read post]
19 Sep 2019, 1:25 am by CMS
  Dissolution refers power back to the people by giving them a chance to elect new representations, whereas after prorogation the same MPs reconvene. 1210: Lord Garnier QC refers to witness statement of Sir John Major KG CH as to the purpose of prorogation, why it is exercised and what considerations might impact on its use. [read post]