Search for: "Matter of Provost v Provost" Results 1 - 20 of 74
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Apr 2016, 6:08 pm by Eugene Volokh
” That phrase, like “Fuck the Draft,” would be constitutionally protected speech (at least when not said face-to-face to someone who is likely to be insulted, see Cohen v. [read post]
5 May 2010, 12:21 pm by Erin Miller
That is the tradition that has always mattered most to Justice Stevens. [read post]
26 Jan 2013, 5:32 pm
In Meier v Rose, 2012 ABQB 82 (CanLII), Mr. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 3:32 am by Rosalind English
The Court’s reasoning  Taking in to account the fact that the Provost Branch were plainly involved in matters surrounding the detention and internment of suspected persons in Iraq, it was impossible to avoid the conclusion that the IHAT lacked the requisite independence, since some of the members of the IHAT were themselves Provost members. [read post]
25 Oct 2020, 9:01 pm by Austin Sarat and Daniel B. Edelman
His practice, on behalf of employees and consumers, has involved primarily employment discrimination, whistleblower, civil rights/civil liberties and consumer matters. [read post]
2 Aug 2020, 9:01 pm by Austin Sarat
”But last month, in Trump v Mazars, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a five-judge majority, retreated from the Court’s prior deference to Congress’s oversight authority, at least in matters where it seeks access to personal information from the president. [read post]
30 Nov 2013, 3:18 pm by Howard Knopf
This follows the comment by Cheryl Regehr, V-P & Provost of the University of Toronto, filed November 18, 2013.HPK [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 5:41 am by Keith Jones
I am visiting Morgantown this weekend to attend the WVU v. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 5:41 am by Keith Jones
I am visiting Morgantown this weekend to attend the WVU v. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 8:07 am by Joy Waltemath
Alleged violations of a university’s internal administrative policies were not violations of law as required by the Texas Whistleblower Act, nor were a university professor’s reports of them made to an appropriate law enforcement authority, ruled the Texas Supreme Court, finding the lower court lacked subject matter jurisdiction (University of Houston v Barth, June 14, 2013, per curiam). [read post]