Search for: "Lynch v. Lynch" Results 41 - 60 of 2,655
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Apr 2024, 12:53 pm by Annette Demers
John’s v Wallace Lynch, et al (judgement reserved or rendered with reasons to follow, 16 November 2023, 40302). [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 12:05 am by Josh Richman
  Resources:  The New Yorker: “A Facial-Recognition Tour of New York” (Jan. 15, 2024)  EFF: “Clearview AI—Yet Another Example of Why We Need A Ban on Law Enforcement Use of Face Recognition Now” (Jan. 31, 2020)  EFF on Face Recognition Technology  Testimony of EFF’s Jennifer Lynch on Face Recognition to the House Oversight Committee (March 2017)  ACLU v. [read post]
22 Mar 2024, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
ICYMI: "Maricopa County Honors Public Defenders and Landmark Legal Victories [such as Gideon v. [read post]
10 Mar 2024, 5:04 pm by INFORRM
On 7-8 March 2024, there was a hearing in the data protection case of Lynch v Serious Fraud Office KB-2024-000237. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:19 am by INFORRM
On 27 February 2024, there was a hearing in the case of Rodoy v Optical Express Limited and others KB-2023-002437. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 5:16 pm by Tom Ginsburg
The famous Brandeis brief appears around that time, in such cases as Muller v. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
For the Balkinization symposium on Robert Post,  The Taft Court: Making Law for a Divided Nation, 1921–1930 (Cambridge University Press, 2024).Robert Post             Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., who devised the funds (symbolically) supporting the volume discussed in this symposium, lived most of his life in the shadow of his rock star father, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 8:42 am
Today's advance release medical malpractice law opinion: Lynch v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm by renholding
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1]  This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]