Search for: "Edwards v. Means"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,919
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Apr 2024, 9:19 pm
Edwards Lifesciences Corp. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 2:27 am
He stated that the judgments in Johnson and Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc; Cornwall County Court v McCabe [2004] UKHL 35 both recognised that provisions in the ERA did not supersede an employee’s common law and contractual rights and he allowed the appeal. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 1:38 pm
For example, in the 2010 case Lustgraaf v. [read post]
13 May 2012, 5:52 pm
Assuming it finds they were, it then has to decide whether Edwards accepted them willfully, meaning he knew they were illegal campaign contributions and intended to violate the law by accepting them. [read post]
3 Dec 2013, 8:39 am
Circuit decision in Ali v. [read post]
29 May 2023, 7:15 am
But, this does not necessarily mean that Edwards committed copyright infringement. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 8:46 am
Yang suggested that such a law might be too “undifferentiated” and therefore fail under Lujan v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 6:44 am
See Barhoumi v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 11:55 am
Edwards. [read post]
1 Mar 2015, 5:53 pm
Edward Zelinsky (Cardozo) has just posted on SSRN his article (42 Rutgers Law Record 109-25) The Aftermath of Hobby Lobby: HSAs and HRAs as the Least Restrictive Means. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 6:09 am
The ICA that Edwards signed contains this arbitration clause: Contractor and Company agree that final and binding arbitration will be the exclusive means of resolving any disputes between Contractor and Company. [read post]
21 Mar 2022, 12:37 pm
This is another classic Justice Wiley opinion, which means that it's (1) short (e.g., eight pages), with (2) tons of clippy, short sentences. [read post]
2 Mar 2013, 1:58 am
Meaning and honest comment The principles for ascertaining meaning and the honest comment defence were largely undisputed. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 7:24 am
The following is a little piece by the IPKat's valued friend and colleague, European patent attorney Kevin Cordina (Olswang LLP), who writes: "In Edwards Lifesciences AG v Cook Biotech Incorporated a US priority application was filed in the name of three inventors, with the rights from one of those inventors passing to Cook. [read post]
24 Aug 2013, 7:24 am
” Edwards Lifesciences LLC v. [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 6:15 am
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 4:44 pm
The South African High Court judgment in the case of amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services [2019] ZAGPPHC 384 is a victory for privacy rights. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 4:07 pm
In considering the meaning of “harassment”, Rix LJ drew upon the guidance of the Court of Appeal in Thomas v News Group Newspapers where Lord Phillips defined harassment as: “conduct targeted at an individual which is calculated to produce the consequences described in section 7 and which is oppressive and unreasonable”. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 4:16 am
On Tuesday the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights heard the application in the case of Mosley v United Kingdom. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 1:00 am
The Supreme Court will be publishing its decision tomorrow morning in Edwards v. [read post]
