Search for: "Ehrenfeld v Mahfouz" Results 1 - 19 of 19
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jun 2007, 9:28 am
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has issued its eagerly awaited ruling in Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 8:57 am
Following an answer from New York State's highest court regarding personal jurisdiction in this "libel tourism" challenge, the Second Circuit affirms the dismissal of the lawsuit captioned Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
27 Mar 2008, 6:25 am
Bin Mahfouz To download a copy of the Second Circuit's decision, please use this link: Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
27 Feb 2008, 9:17 am
An op-ed piece in the New York Sun calls for the passage of "Rachel's Law", legislation drafted in response to Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 1:12 pm
In what is labeled a case of "libel tourism," the Second Circuit has affirmed a lower court's ruling that it lacks personal jurisdiction over defendant Khalid Salim Bin Mahfouz in the case of Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
The ramification of the decision in Ehrenfeld v Bin Mahfouz ([2005] EWHC 1156 (QB)) are still continuing to be felt both at home and abroad. [read post]
20 May 2008, 12:37 pm
The first, and the real driving force behind the enactments, is personal jurisdiction.The New York law is a fairly direct response to Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 12:27 pm
" You can access today's ruling of the Court of Appeals of New York -- that State's highest court -- in Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 6:15 am
[Texas Lawyer] Second Circuit doesn't quite yet decide Ehrenfeld v. [read post]
14 Oct 2011, 5:29 pm by INFORRM
A witness statement referred to advice received from a practising American lawyer on the SPEECH Act, a federal version of the ‘Rachel’s Law’ statute introduced in New York State following a campaign by the Defendant in Bin Mahfouz v Ehrenfeld ([2005] EWHC 1156 (QB)] (a case in which an American author was found to have libelled a Saudi billionaire in a book published in the USA). [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 3:54 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“Purposeful” activities are “those by which a defendant, through volitional acts, avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within [New York], thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws” (id., quoting Fischbarg, 9 NY3d at 380 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see generally Ehrenfeld v Bin Mahfouz, 9 NY3d 501, 508 [2007]). [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 4:04 pm by INFORRM
Bin Mahfouz & ors v Ehrenfeld & Another [2005] EWHC 1156 (QB) Eady J. [read post]