Search for: "Odell v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 54
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jan 2017, 4:02 pm
But the differences with other European Union member states are even more striking, according to IPI research. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 12:20 am
These three paragraphs state cumulative conditions. [read post]
27 Sep 2016, 4:20 pm
He too considered Bonnard v Perryman and Reynolds v Malocco, as well as the hugely-influential decision of Clarke J in Cogley v RTE [2005] 4 IR 79, [2005] IEHC 180 (8 June 2005). [read post]
4 Jul 2016, 4:07 pm
I agree – if Kennedy and Sullivan are anything to go by, the levels are not very high (especially by comparison with damages for defamation; see Mosley v News Group Newspapers [2008] EWHC 1777 (QB) (24 July 2008) [212] (Eady J); though note also Representative Claimants v MGN Ltd [2016] 2 WLR 1217, [2015] EWCA Civ 1291 (17 December 2015)). [read post]
3 May 2016, 10:41 am
For all that reform of our defamation law is undoubtedly necessary, we must not over-state the problems. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 8:29 am
Very quick, unpublished opinion today in United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 4:06 pm
In the process, the divergent conclusions in Johnson v Medical Defence Union [2007] EWCA Civ 262 (28 March 2007) and the earlier Irish case ofCollins v FBD Insurance plc [2013] IEHC 137 (14 March 2013) (interpreting the frankly odd section 7 of the Data Protection Act, 1988 (also here)) were rejected. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 9:07 am
Miller v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 11:44 am
Freeze has stated on their blog: “Ironically, Bingham McCutchen knew their arbitration agreement, as originally drafted, was invalid in light of a 2009 Massachusetts Supreme Court opinion: Warfield v. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 3:30 pm
Washburn student intern Amy Ahrens and I won in State v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 4:50 am
Indeed, it is still the case that no conversation about the state of the Irish economy is complete without a disparaging reference to him. [read post]
22 Nov 2012, 12:27 am
Miller, Penn State University: Rhetoric and Judicial Activism: The Case of Hillary Goodridge v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 8:00 am
On the other hand, both the High Court of Australia (Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106, [1992] HCA 45 (30 September 1992)) and the European Court of Human Rights (Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VgT) v Switzerland (No 1) 24699/94, (2002) 34 EHRR 159, [2001] ECHR 412 (28 June 2001); TV Vest As & Rogaland Pensjonistparti v Norway 21132/05, (2009) 48 EHRR 51, [2008] ECHR 1687 (11 December 2008); Verein gegen Tierfabriken Schweiz (VgT)… [read post]
26 May 2012, 3:02 pm
Georgia Shelby Bell, University of Minnesota: The Presidency as a Tool for Foreign Policy: An Exploration of the Implications of United States v. [read post]
26 May 2012, 3:02 pm
Georgia Shelby Bell, University of Minnesota: The Presidency as a Tool for Foreign Policy: An Exploration of the Implications of United States v. [read post]
14 May 2012, 12:24 pm
However, there is no shortage of cases in which such appeals are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the original requests for payment did not constitute “claims” under the CDA.One recent illustration of this problem involved the distinction between routine and non-routine requests for payment, as addressed by a recent split-panel decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Parsons Global Services, Inc. v. [read post]
6 May 2012, 2:41 am
David Richards J held that this would therefore have involved a significant departures from two fundamental common law principles: first, the principle of open justice requires that trials are conducted in public; and, second, the principle of natural justice includes the right of a party to know the case against him and the evidence on which it is based (relying on Al Rawi v The Security Service [2011] UKSC 34 (13 July 2011) [10]-[13] (Lord Dyson); and later, in respect of open justice, to… [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 5:57 pm
The reasons are not difficult to state. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 5:36 am
For example, there was much simplistic reference to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in von Hannover v Germany 59320/00, (2005) 40 EHRR 1, [2004] ECHR 294 (24 June 2004)), without reference to the significantly narrower sequel in von Hannover v Germany (No 2) 40660/08 and 60641/08 [2012] ECHR 228 (7 February 2012) and Axel Springer AG v Germany 39954/08 [2012] ECHR 227 (7 February 2012). [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 8:24 pm
Peter Odell Campbell, Univ of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign: The Procedural Queer: Substantive Due Process, Lawrence v. [read post]
