Search for: "US v. Richard Royal"
Results 161 - 180
of 222
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Any use, or any use within the last seven or 30 days, would be fairly irrelevant to the pathophysiology of a cerebral hemorrhage. [read post]
25 Feb 2013, 6:23 am
A case worth noting, from the end of January: in Heafield v Times Newspaper Ltd [2013] UKEAT (17 January 2013), the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that the use of bad language about the Pope did not constitute harassment within the meaning of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003. [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 4:27 pm
There are still a few spaces left, so come and join us. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 12:11 pm
Steyn J found that Vardy had used her agent Caroline Watt as an accomplice to leak the posts and that she condoned and actively engaged in the leaks. [read post]
23 Feb 2014, 4:03 pm
The PressBof legal challenge to the Cross-Party Royal Charter on the Self-Regulation of the Press continues its ill-fated journey through the courts. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 11:30 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum. [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 12:49 am
Update: A commenter points out that aside from the issue fee, Facebook will have file a Statement of Use and use the trademark on its own in commerce before it has actual legal claim over the word “Face. [read post]
29 Jan 2023, 4:40 am
As a Royal Peculiar, the chapel is under the Monarch’s control, who exercises it via the Lord Great Chamberlain whose Secretary, Black Rod, has responsibility for managing its use. [read post]
23 Feb 2022, 2:17 pm
Martinez, Alex Verdugo, Xander Bogaerts, Hunter Renfroe, Christian Vázquez, Kike Hernandez, Bobby Dalbec, Christian Arroyo). [read post]
26 Feb 2022, 6:53 pm
In a seminal 1977 discrimination case, Casteneda v. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 3:01 pm
Comments and suggestions (especially for compiling a useful student friendly reading list) gratefully received as this remains very much a work in progress. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 3:49 pm
By John Knox, cross-posted from Center for Progressive Reform On February 28, the Supreme Court will hear argument in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum, a case with far-reaching implications for efforts to hold corporations accountable when they commit or are complicit in abuses of human rights. [read post]
27 Sep 2017, 11:47 am
Sauter posted the government's reply brief in Carpenter v. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 7:57 am
The audit did not turn out well for Richards v. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 8:29 pm
Richard J. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 4:03 pm
But as the recommendation is primarily aimed at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, the criticism seems unfair. [read post]
30 Nov 2009, 9:53 am
By using the agency theory discussed in Judge Reinhardt’s decision, we hold the corporation to a much higher standard that would require greater transparency in their business relationships and greater scrutiny of its business decisions in areas associated with political turmoil and human rights violations. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 7:43 pm
(Editor’s Note: The article below, just published in The Deal, came to us from its author David Marcus.) [read post]
4 Nov 2022, 7:56 am
Such is the high-profile case of an allegedly Nazi looted Modigliani leaked to have been stored in Geneva Freeport.[29]Maestracci v. [read post]
