Search for: "Turner v. State"
Results 1241 - 1260
of 1,331
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Mar 2012, 4:24 am
Title V, Private Company Flexibility and Growth. [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 12:22 pm
• Roger V. [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 12:22 pm
• Roger V. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 2:14 pm
In the case of Doherty v. [read post]
16 Jul 2015, 9:00 pm
Consistently with its reasoning in Gasser (Case C-116/02) and Turner v Grovit (Case C-259/02), the Court held in West Tankers that “even though proceedings [to enforce an arbitration agreement via an anti-suit injunction] do not come within the scope of [the Brussels I Regulation], they may nevertheless have consequences which undermine its effectiveness”, if they “prevent a court of another Member State from exercising the jurisdiction conferred on it by… [read post]
11 Feb 2009, 5:34 am
One curious side-product of the ECJ's decisions in Gasser and Turner was that the potential availability of an anti-suit injunction was thought to provide a reason for choosing arbitration instead of judicial resolution. [read post]
3 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm
Indeed, as one federal court recently stated, “the ‘crypto’ nomenclature may be of recent vintage, but the challenged transactions fall comfortably within the framework that courts have used to identify securities for nearly eighty years. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 12:34 am
Supreme Court will almost certainly extend the scope of the Second Amendment right to bear arms to limit state and federal regulation of firearms, based on oral arguments in McDonald v. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 12:08 pm
Ba ba ba, bye BabybelFromageries Bel v J Sainsbury Plc [2019] EWHC 3454 (December 2019)Fact of the day: I don’t like cheese (you could say I’m not fondue it). [read post]
5 Jan 2019, 3:06 pm
A useful summary of this can be found in a case called Flannery & Anor v Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd [1999] EWCA Civ 81, where the Court of Appeal said : (1) The duty is a function of due process, and therefore of justice. [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 12:11 am
Department of Justice has stated that the criminal division has started a far-reaching probe, and that they are “responding aggressively and taking it very seriously. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 10:02 am
Hassel v. [read post]
24 Aug 2019, 6:30 am
Citizens, 1919-1924Conveners: Kenneth Mack, Harvard Law School (kmack@law.harvard.edu), Laurie Wood, Florida State University (lmwood@fsu.edu), Jacqueline Briggs, University of Toronto - Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies (jacq.briggs@mail.utoronto.ca), and John Wertheimer, Davidson College (jow [read post]
30 Apr 2016, 3:28 pm
That’s Washington v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 12:10 pm
Courts overwhelmed by unrepresented litigants 10:51- Good progress — several states enact legislation that earmark returns from filing fees to legal services. [read post]
5 Mar 2024, 6:46 pm
Summers v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 12:04 am
The ruling in United States v. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 7:03 am
Baker v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:26 am
United States v. [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 9:04 am
(See Miller v. [read post]
