Search for: "Goodwin v. State" Results 121 - 140 of 370
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Aug 2016, 7:27 am by Adam Craggs, Partner, RPC
Applying the principles of R v Del Basso and Goodwin [2010] EWCA Crim 1119 and R v Waya [2012] UKSC 51, the Court of Appeal concluded that it would be wrong in principle and repugnant to carry out an accounting exercise in respect of those monies. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 4:55 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  Clearly, law firms are significantly behind the curve, despite law enforcement agencies and cybersecurity firms issuing repeated warnings about the risks of attacks by insiders, fraudsters, hacktivists, unscrupulous competitors and nation-states. [read post]
12 Apr 2016, 4:49 pm by INFORRM
Since the landmark judgment in the case of Goodwin v. the United Kingdom in 1996, the European Court hung several wagons on this locomotive judgment of source protection. [read post]
17 Feb 2016, 4:38 pm by Zosha Millman
Brochu of Shipman & Goodwin on their School Law blog Shared Office Space—The “Uber” of Commercial Real Estate? [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 8:57 am by Dennis Crouch
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 3:42 am by Amy Howe
On Monday, the Justices announced that they would review United States v. [read post]
22 Dec 2015, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
As far as sources are concerned, both UK and Strasbourg cases have recognised the important function served by journalists’ ability to protect their sources (Goodwin v UK, Mersey Care NHS Trust v. [read post]
20 Dec 2015, 4:47 am by Dennis Crouch
For that point, the brief sites Seymour v. [read post]
18 Dec 2015, 8:30 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The aggrieved employee has the burden of proving that his or her employee organization’s action, or inaction, breached its “Duty of Fair Representation” DeOliveira v New York State Pub. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 4:00 am by Administrator
In Goodwin v British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) the Supreme Court upheld British Columbia’s ARP scheme as valid provincial law that does not unlawfully invade federal criminal law power or contravene section 11 of the Charter, but the Court also ruled that the seizure of a breath sample using an approved screening device (ASD) under the scheme as previously administered was an unreasonable seizure under section 8 of the Charter. [read post]