Search for: "STATE v ATKINS" Results 101 - 120 of 670
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2019, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
” This provision was to be interpreted in the light of the common law background, which the Supreme Court summarised as follows [6-7]: “[A] working definition of what makes a statement defamatory, derived from the speech of Lord Atkin in Sim v Stretch [1936] 2 All ER 1237, 1240, is that “the words tend to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 9:30 pm by Mitra Sharafi
Islam v Secretary of State for the Home Department, R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Another, ex parte Shah (1999) Nora Honkala72. [read post]
28 Feb 2019, 1:00 am by CAFE
United States ,1944 An article in the Washington Post on court nominees refusing to answer questions about Brown v. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 8:55 am by Amy Howe
After the Supreme Court’s 2002 decision in Atkins v. [read post]
12 Dec 2018, 7:43 am by John Elwood
Our next case is a sequel: Moore v. [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 9:56 am by John Elwood
State Bar of California and Lathrop v. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 12:22 pm by John Elwood
Texas, a Supreme Court decision from 2017, to find that an Ohio court unreasonably applied Atkins v. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 6:08 am
Posted by Cydney Posner, Cooley LLP, on Friday, October 12, 2018 Tags: Boards of Directors, Director nominations, Proxy contests, Proxy voting, SEC, Securities regulation, Shareholder voting, Universal proxy ballots SEC Sanctions Investment Firm for Inadequate Cybersecurity and Identity Theft Prevention Policies Posted by Sabastian V. [read post]