Search for: "Company Doe v. Public Citizen" Results 101 - 120 of 1,976
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Nov 2022, 4:13 am by Bernard Bell
Bank Securities Litigation, 478 F.Supp. 577 (E.D.N.Y. 1979); accord, In re Sealed Case, 121 F.3d at 738 )(shielding internal government deliberations in th[e] context [of governmental misconduct] does not serve “the public’s interest in honest, effective government. [read post]
28 Apr 2013, 5:02 pm by INFORRM
Under the principle in Derbyshire v Times Newspapers, public bodies cannot sue for libel. [read post]
22 Sep 2009, 1:46 pm
For hundreds of years, courts have been there to protect citizens from harm. [read post]
25 Jul 2007, 6:18 pm
There is a big difference between promoting the public’s right to know through keeping proceedings public, on the one hand, see Foltz v. [read post]
2 Nov 2014, 4:00 am by Administrator
John Doe et al. 2014 FC 161Copyright – Equity – Practice – Telecommunications Summary: Voltage Pictures LLC, a film production company, hired a forensic investigation company to investigate whether any of Voltage’s cinematographic works were being copied and distributed in Canada over P2P (peer to peer) file sharing networks using BitTorrent. [read post]
2 May 2011, 5:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
  Public Citizen's Consumer Law & Policy Blog has collected links to much of the early press coverage. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 10:29 am by Andres
Effective protection of EU citizens’ rights with several redress possibilities: Complaints have to be resolved by companies within 45 days. [read post]
15 Feb 2019, 4:00 am by Sean Vanderfluit
While not directly cited on this point, this finding shares strong similarities to PanAmerianca at para. 33, where the Chief Justice of Alberta spoke of the obligation of the citizen not being to the peace officer or public authority that enforces the law, but rather to the public and community at large. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
Because Plaintiff and Defendants are both citizens of D.C., complete diversity does not exist among the parties, and this action cannot proceed under 28 U.S.C. [read post]
1 Apr 2009, 4:15 am
Concerned Citizens has verified the fact that Shulman NEVER revealed his business relationship with the food service company PRIOR to the awarding of this contract. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 7:00 am by Catherine Padhi
Corporations have free speech rights under Citizens United v. [read post]
8 Feb 2021, 5:11 am by Daphne Keller
  Twitter does this for tweets, Facebook for posts, YouTube for videos, Google for search results, local news sites for user comments, etc. [read post]