Search for: "Howes v. Essex"
Results 141 - 160
of 292
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Feb 2012, 9:24 am
By Cara CooksonState v. [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 12:27 pm
Knorr v. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 11:30 pm
Ever since the notion of an operational duty was first enunciated in Osman v United Kingdom (2000) 29 EHRR 245, it has become something of a judicial mantra that the threshold for establishing a “real and immediate” threat was high (see for example Re Officer L [2007] UKHL 36, and Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2009] AC 681 [41] and [66],). [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 1:16 pm
Individual cases, such as Melanie’s, demonstrate how arbitrary a judge-drawn line can become. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 11:03 am
Dee V Benson, US Dist. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 9:04 am
In March of 2010 the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Padilla v. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 6:54 am
Knorr v. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 6:14 am
Wessen Jazrawi is a qualified solicitor and holds an LLM in International Human Rights Law from the University of Essex. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am
Comment This case is significant for two reasons: First, it tasks the Supreme Court with answering the question raised obiter by Lady Hale in Savage v South Essex NHS Trust [2009] 1 AC 653, namely “what is the extent of the state’s duty to protect all people against an immediate risk of self-harm? [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 3:55 am
(TTABlog) How damaging to your case is a cancelled trademark registration? [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 2:26 am
(Public Knowledge) Library of Congress asks: how should we let you break DRM? [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 5:22 am
To my mind, the case is really a follow-up to Atwater v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 11:24 am
As I see it, Florence is really a follow-up to Atwater v. [read post]
12 Oct 2011, 9:10 am
But where five Justices might draw the line was entirely unpredictable after the hearing on Florence v. [read post]
8 Oct 2011, 7:59 am
County of Essex. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 3:10 am
His case, thus, seems an ideal one to test just how broad a strip-search policy can be, on the basis of the Bell v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 1:47 pm
And now Molly DiBianca who is always on top of things at the Delaware Employment Law Blog has picked up yet another case recently decided by the 3rd Circuit, Disparate Impact of Newark, NJ’s Residency Requirement .In Meditz v. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 8:17 am
Bank v. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 10:26 am
Rubber Co. v. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 4:42 am
It’s happening, but not how you think. [read post]
