Search for: "PRECISION STANDARD V US"
Results 1941 - 1960
of 4,554
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jan 2017, 8:33 am
They may also be over-revised: if a specific jury has a comprehension greater than the Plain English standard, then the instructions have unnecessarily redacted the legal precision of its language. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 7:39 am
” In this case, the employee’s claim was precisely that her vacation leave ought to be deemed available in May rather than December, because of state law affecting the use of leave. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 6:00 am
Let us call this "strong realism. [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 9:47 pm
” Islamic Society of Basking Ridge v. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 10:48 pm
”However, in Hospira v Cubist [2016] EWHC 1285 (Pat), Carr J suggested that he would have found Claim 1, which included the use of a standard buffer, a standard agent and a standard purification process, obvious over the CGK alone had he not already found it obvious over a piece of prior art. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 6:55 am
The penalty to women was exacerbated by the fact that child support used to be taxed in the hands of the recipient parent, but not the payer, an issue that was litigated up to the Supreme Court in Thibaudeau v Canada (1995).Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms spells out that this is a country that believes in substantive equality, not just formal equality. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 2:14 pm
The question, in large part, was the significance of Lord Neuberger’s judgment in Hotak v Southwark London Borough Council; Kanu v Southwark London Borough Council [2016] AC 811, at paras 78 and 79 “78. [read post]
20 Jan 2017, 6:57 pm
Miller v. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 1:07 pm
The first grant came in District of Columbia v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 11:32 am
In sum, no justice seemed willing to overrule Jordan v DeGeorge and its review of removal provisions under due-process vagueness standards. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 10:19 am
Perhaps sensing that they should save their new stuff for the sweeps, the justices this week have given us only a bunch of returning relists. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 7:35 am
Abbott v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 11:12 am
” Wood v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 11:12 am
” Wood v. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 10:30 am
In Ashcroft v. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 7:01 am
And it looks like all the weird news stories are finally behind us. [read post]
11 Jan 2017, 7:19 am
Davis v. [read post]
11 Jan 2017, 3:37 am
Such a finding would be too speculative and too likely to be used by courts as a shortcut for a causation inquiry. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 9:12 am
On examining the authorities relied upon in the Court of Appeal (R v Ngyuen [2008] EWCA Crim 585 and R v O’Dowd [2009] EWCA Crim 905), the Court did not consider that there was any clear definitive statement on the issue now raised. [read post]
9 Jan 2017, 6:57 am
Campbell v. [read post]
