Search for: "SHIELDS v. SMITH" Results 121 - 140 of 392
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jul 2012, 2:02 pm by Jeffrey Kahn
Yesterday the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit released its opinion in Latif v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 2:34 am by Andrew Trask
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Mich., 654 F.3d 618 (6th Cir. 2011). [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 6:15 am by Florian Mueller
So the ones who argue that legislative intervention is needed to shield SMEs from SEP abuse can't point to the UK InterDigital v. [read post]
4 Jan 2010, 10:44 am by Meg Martin
Past sexual conduct evidence falls into the class of evidence the rape shield law was specifically designed to exclude. [read post]
28 May 2020, 2:05 am by INFORRM
Two Commons Committees – the Home Affairs Committee and the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee – have recently held evidence sessions with government Ministers discussing, among other things, the government’s proposed Online Harms legislation. [read post]
11 Dec 2007, 9:19 pm
The doctrine is based on the inherent power of courts to enforce their judgments (see Degen v United States, supra at 823), and it has long been recognized and applied to those who evade the law while simultaneously seeking its protection (see Bonahan v Nebraska, 125 US 692 [1887]; Smith v United States, 94 US 97 [1876])" (Matter of Skiff-Murray v Murray, 305 AD2d 751, 752 [2003]). [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 3:44 am by Edith Roberts
 Smith, in which Justice Antonin Scalia “concluded that courts could not use the First Amendment’s free exercise clause to carve out exemptions from ‘neutral laws of general applicability,’” in a new case, Ricks v. [read post]
17 Jul 2016, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
On 15 July 2016, Green J handed down judgment in the case of Smith v Unknown Defendant [2016] EWHC 1775 (QB). [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:09 am by admin
  Absolutely – disclosure is the shield, and disclosure should be a client’s right. [read post]