Search for: "Stillings v. Davis" Results 141 - 160 of 1,940
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jan 2023, 10:18 pm by Michael Douglas
The second ground, that Australia is an inappropriate forum, turns on application of the ‘clearly inappropriate forum’ test of the Australian forum non conveniens doctrine: Chandrasekaran v Navaratnem [2022] NSWSC 346, [5]–[8]; Sapphire Group Pty Ltd v Luxotico HK Ltd [2021] NSWSC 589, [77]–[80]; Studorp Ltd v Robinson [2012] NSWCA 382, [5], [62]. [read post]
8 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
  Still, I quite agree with Paul that the actual endorsement of Southern secession, once one knows the impetus behind it, is equivalent to “endorsing outcomes that are inconsistent with basic human rights and fundamental justice. [read post]
26 Dec 2022, 1:43 pm by Thomas James
Photographer Jeffrey Sedlik took a photograph of musician Miles Davis. [read post]
20 Dec 2022, 1:12 am by Laura Macfarlane
The full citation of the judgment is: E TŪ INCORPORATED v RASIER OPERATIONS BV [2022] NZEmpC 192 [25 October 2022] and can be found here. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 11:02 pm by Samuel Bray
On 2, that the APA didn't add a remedy of vacatur is shown by text (the objects of "set aside" and its applicability across all kinds of actions including habeas), context (it's not in the remedies section), canons (hiding elephants in mouseholes), legislative history (no one noticed the elephant), treatises like Davis and Jaffe (still no one notices the elephant), and cases like Abbot Labs (still no one sees the elephant—why again do we think… [read post]
17 Nov 2022, 4:00 am by Guest Author
EPA and more in the concerns animating Justice Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2022, 4:00 am by Guest Author
” Although not every lawyer or legal academic adhering to the Court’s views is on the political right, the ascendancy of both contemporary originalism and unitary executive theory has everything to do with their attractiveness to conservatives in the wake of Brown v. [read post]