Search for: "Utter v. Utter" Results 1321 - 1340 of 2,630
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jun 2023, 3:29 am by SHG
Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling in Bostock v Clayton County, which held that Title VII’s ban on sex discrimination also extended to transgender and gay workers. [read post]
We argued in a post Tuesday that a complete theory of ordinary meaning requires us to take into account the comparative frequency of different senses of words, the (syntactic, semantic and pragmatic) context of an utterance, its historical usage and the speech community in which it was uttered. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 10:01 pm by Ken
In Aggravation: V. snarky assholes. [read post]
9 Dec 2015, 3:38 am by SHG
As the court observed in its 1977 decision in Fiallo v. [read post]
26 Apr 2017, 3:48 am by SHG
Utter nonsense used to wage the war for America’s tears, just like cities claiming to be sanctuaries is utter nonsense. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 5:13 am by SHG
And so too will the fine people of Prague, Doc Martin included.In Tinker v. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 4:29 am by SHG
After that, the Court backed away, slowly at first, until it held in 1972, in Gooding v. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 2:08 pm by Jim Hodgson
  Indeed, Section 10 refers generally to the prohibition of ‘any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in contravention’ to SEC rules, which go beyond personally uttering a misrepresentation and surely encompasses using others to knowingly make a false public statement. [read post]