Search for: "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan" Results 241 - 260 of 301
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Mar 2011, 7:06 am by Christopher Bird
Further, the English approach places the burden of proving that no damage has been caused on the defendant.This differs from the American approach to defamation, which since New York Times Co. v. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 9:20 am
The Defendants were able to ascertain that none of the players at issue were resident in Indiana at the time of death and the case was transferred to New York and went on to settle. [read post]
24 Dec 2010, 4:10 am
Typically this privilege is extended in connection with some governmental function such statements made by a member of a legislative body in connection with his or her legislative duties or when uttered as sworn testimony in a judicial or legislative proceeding.** Common requires proof of hatred or ill will.*** See New York Times Co. v. [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 7:20 pm by Orin Kerr
Finally, he litigated and won New York Times v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 7:07 pm by Patrick
Sullivan was entitled to a libel judgment, to protect his reputation and that of the Montgomery Police, from outsiders such as the New York Times who printed lies, libel, and calumny without knowing the true facts.   [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 11:11 am by Jane Kleiner
And, according to the seminal cases New York Times Co. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 pm by Steven M. Taber
Tanco’s facility at 10520 Wolcott Drive, Kansas City, Kan., did not have an FRP in place at the time of a May 2009 EPA inspection, in violation of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), according to an administrative consent agreement and final order filed in Kansas City, Kan. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:45 am by John Steele
From Vorhees New Jersey Legal Malpractice Blog: In Sullivan v. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 11:03 am by Erin Miller
His opinions for the Court in areas such as the First Amendment (New York Times v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 10:29 am by Amy Wright
For more information about the Graham case, check out the New York Times coverage or this Wall Street Journal article.Professors Connie de la Vega and Michelle Leighton were co-authors of the SCOTUS amicus curiae brief submitted by Amnesty International in the Graham and Sullivan cases, arguing that the Court should consider international law and opinion when applying the Eighth Amendment to life sentences without parole for juveniles.  [read post]