Search for: "Gibson v. Stevens" Results 41 - 60 of 91
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Aug 2008, 1:11 am
They appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment to the principal of their school, Steven Lafon ("Lafon"), the director of the Blount County schools, Alvin Hord ("Hord"), and the Blount County School Board1 on their First Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, and Due Process Clause claims. 08a0306p.06 2008/08/20 USA v. [read post]
18 Apr 2009, 12:04 am
Co-Chair of appellate practice group at Gibson Dunn. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 4:54 am by Broc Romanek
" Yesterday was a big day for SCOTUS as it was Justice Stevens last day and many in the audience sported a bow-tie in his honor. [read post]
The significance is not so much, as Sir John Stevens concluded in 2003, that the murder could have been prevented, though I entirely concur with this finding. [read post]
21 May 2015, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
A few weeks ago the Supreme Court handed down an important yet under-noticed case, Williams-Yulee v. [read post]
13 Dec 2019, 6:00 am
Elections Posted by Michael Sozan, Center for American Progress, on Friday, December 6, 2019 Tags: Accountability, Citizens United v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 9:42 am by Bexis
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45–46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957).Arters, 2013 WL 308768, at *1.Umm…. [read post]
1 Nov 2009, 4:30 pm by Mark Beese
Coulter, Vice President and Chair, Client Development and Growth Practice, Hildebrandt José Cunningham, Chief Marketing Officer, Crowell & Moring LLP Beth Cuzzone, Director of Business Development, Goulston & Storrs Patrick V. [read post]
11 Jun 2017, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
In the case of Gim v Byeon [2017] NSWDC 136 Gibson DCJ dismissed a claim for slander arising out of words spoken to a journalist in a restaurant due to a “fatal variance” between the words complained of and the words proved to have been spoken. [read post]
5 Mar 2011, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
  Discusses the decision in Gibson v IC and Craven District Council EA/2010/0095, where the Tribunal ordered disclosure of information insofar as it related to the use of public funds; the remainder could be withheld on the basis of FIO Act 2000, s 40. [read post]