Search for: "Hughes v. Frank" Results 1 - 20 of 127
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Feb 2024, 12:33 am by INFORRM
There was also a strike out application in the case of Vince v Associated Newspapers Limited. [read post]
13 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
” [21] Mark Tushnet took on the twice-abandoned volume on the Hughes Court. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 5:54 am
By this time the case was called Chevron v. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 7:38 am by INFORRM
Finally, the Judge stressed that there is a burden of full and frank disclosure on the applicant and the Co [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 4:44 pm by INFORRM
The deal was characterised as “underhand, dubious and lacking in frankness” [13]. [read post]
7 Jul 2023, 1:03 pm by Ryan Goodman
Eddington (Senior Fellow, Cato Institute)“Lessons Learned and Caveats for the Future: The January 6, 2021, Attempted Insurrection”Expert Statement Mary Anne Franks (Professor of Law and Michael R. [read post]
9 Apr 2023, 9:30 pm by ernst
[On Tuesday, April 4, Georgetown Law devoted a session of its faculty workshop to honoring the publication of The Hughes Court: From Progressivism to Pluralism, 1930-1941 (Cambridge University Press, 2022), a volume in the Oliver Wendell Holmes Devise History of the Supreme Court of the United States, by Mark V. [read post]
12 Mar 2023, 9:31 am by Dave Maass
This so-called "Glomar response" is derived from a Cold War-era case, when the CIA refused to confirm or deny to the Los Angeles Times whether it had information about the USNS Hughes Glomar Explorer, a CIA ship that was used to try to salvage a sunken Soviet spy sub. [read post]
14 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
I offer a couple of examples, written by Chief Justice Hughes (who was no slouch as a lawyer), out of many that could be deployed.[12]  Wood v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 2:50 am by Emma Kent
Disposal of assets Impact on award In M v M (Financial Misconduct: Subpoena against Third Party) [2006], in breach of undertakings, which are solemn promises to the court, the husband failed to provide full and frank disclosure of his financial affairs and had also gambled away a significant amount of money. [read post]