Search for: "People v. Hayes (1990)" Results 1 - 20 of 28
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Oct 2020, 6:53 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court says that while inmates must exhaust this administrative remedy, they do not have to wait for the jailers to take their sweet time in resolving the grievances before they can file suit.The case is Hayes v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 5:00 am
Supp.3d 391, 408 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (“a plaintiff must demonstrate” that “a different, more accurate warning” would have “changed” the decision to use the product); Hayes v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
 A warning about an inherent risk – a so-called “risk warning” – serves an entirely different purpose.With inherent risks, people are warned so they can decide whether that risk outweighs the benefits that might be gained from using the product. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 6:25 am
Hayes (NY Attorney at Law) SeanHayes@ipglegal.com www.theasianlawblog.com [read post]
29 Dec 2008, 9:53 pm
Christine Bruhn at the University of California, Davis published many of the pioneering studies on consumer acceptance, and recently made this comment about consumer acceptance of food irradiation in a series on the new FDA rule published by Jim Prevor’s Perishable Pundit (2008): “My work and that of other researchers over the last 20 years has found some people are ready to buy irradiated product right now….This group of consumers represents maybe 10 percent… [read post]