Search for: "People v. Carroll" Results 101 - 120 of 277
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2013, 7:22 am by Conor McEvily
Jeremy Leaming at ACSblog notes that with the Court’s decision in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
5 Apr 2015, 3:52 pm by Stephen Bilkis
This is in contrast to the Constitution's use of the more restrictive phrase "in the manner to be prescribed by law" in connection with the waiver of trial by jury in civil actions (NY Const, art I, § 2) which suggests that implementing legislation would be required in that context (see People v Carroll, 3 NY2d 686 [1958]). [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 4:07 am by INFORRM
China The Fei Chan Dao blog has published a translation of a Notice expelling Zhang Guilin, Former Director of the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the Beijing People’s Government, from the Party and Public Office for “serious violations of discipline and law. [read post]
27 Nov 2022, 4:38 pm by INFORRM
O’Carroll alleges that Facebook “violates general data protection regulations by processing and profiling her personal data that’s then tailored for the advertisements. [read post]
9 Dec 2020, 4:00 am by Administrator
Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 5:20 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Static Control didn’t have antitrust standing federally, per 6th Cir.Rebecca Tushnet - Georgetown University Law Center, representing amicus curiae, Law ProfessorsWhy should people who are primarily interested in TM care? [read post]
9 Dec 2008, 9:25 am
I  don't know why the Supreme Court has it in for people who own and drive cars, but ever since Carroll v. [read post]
11 Jan 2024, 6:44 am by INFORRM
E Jean Carroll v Donald J Trump, twin cases against the former US president one of which came to trial in 2023. [read post]
15 May 2023, 1:53 am by INFORRM
Jean Carroll, in the 1990s by a New York jury. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 9:56 pm by Simon Gibbs
(Thank God for Kynaston v Carroll [2011] EWHC 2179). [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 11:29 am by Eugene Volokh
There cannot be a rule under which "poor people ... have their speech enjoined, while the rich are allowed to speak so long as they pay damages. [read post]