Search for: "P D
v.
Review Board"
Results 101 - 120
of 822
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jul 2022, 9:05 pm
The five most popular proposal topics in 2022, representing 49% of all shareholder proposal submissions, were (i) climate change, (ii) special meetings, (iii) anti-discrimination and diversity, (iv) independent chair, and (v) lobbying spending and political contributions (which tied for fifth most common proposal topic). [read post]
23 Jul 2022, 5:15 am
"In a way, Snapchat "deserved" it as its CEO attempted to help Apple on the last day (apart from closing argument) of last year's Epic Games v. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 1:00 am
Abortion, conscientious objection and the UK Supreme Court: Greater Glasgow Health Board v Doogan & Anor. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm
In Melton Enterprises Ltd v Censorship of Publications Board [2003] 3 IR 623, [2003] IESC 55 (4 November 2003), the Supreme Court upheld the power in section 9 of the Censorship of Publications Act, 1946 (also here) to prohibit the publication of indecent or obscene periodicals. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 8:35 pm
Here, I'd like to flag some changes made to the permitting process. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
York Region District School Board, 2022 ONCA 476 (CanLII) [44] The grievors’ Charter rights were alleged to have been limited not by the arbitrator but by the respondent school board. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:34 pm
The people of Sonoma County decided that the oversight of police officers in that county was inadequate, so they passed an initiative that increased the powers of the police review board to investigate officers, review body-worn camera footage, etc. [read post]
19 Jun 2022, 5:05 pm
In a seminal discrimination case, Casteneda v. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
[Editor’s Note: This post is based on a comment letter submitted to the U.S. [read post]
31 May 2022, 6:43 am
It may be that in this regard Clibbery v Allan is now a dead letter and that Lykiardopulo was wrongly decided. [read post]
20 May 2022, 10:26 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 May 2022, 5:01 am
In BP P.L.C. v. [read post]
13 May 2022, 4:36 am
The Court “assume[d] without deciding that the first factor would weigh in Vaz’s favor. [read post]
6 May 2022, 6:10 am
” Recognizing that the Sherman Act could be read to bar all contracts, federal courts for over a century have interpreted the 1890 antitrust law only to apply to “unreasonable” restraints of trade.[7] The Supreme Court first adopted this concept in its landmark 1911 decision in Standard Oil, upholding the lower court’s dissolution of John D. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Fund, Inc. v Gantt, 796 F Supp 681, 684 [ED NY 1992]). [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 1:12 pm
Fund, Inc. v Gantt, 796 F Supp 681, 684 [ED NY 1992]). [read post]
13 Apr 2022, 12:43 pm
In the Acknowledgements, you credit Adam P. [read post]
6 Apr 2022, 4:00 am
It is subject to the normal process of variation and review on a material change in circumstance: see Reisman v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 11:00 am
With that ID you can find manuals, pictures, and even internal schematics on any device the FCC has reviewed. [read post]
19 Mar 2022, 2:09 pm
The second edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence contained a chapter by the late Professor Margaret Berger, who took pains to point out the difference between agency assessments and the adjudication of causal claims in court: [p]roof of risk and proof of causation entail somewhat different questions because risk assessment frequently calls for a cost-benefit analysis. [read post]
