Search for: "People v. Irvin" Results 1 - 20 of 231
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Aug 2024, 10:00 am
In 2000, he wrote the opinion in People v. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 5:31 pm
This works to bury the sovereign debt owed to First Nations Peoples and licenses the accumulation of further debt through criminalisation of Aboriginal people and the licensing of extractive violence against their lands and waters. [read post]
18 Mar 2024, 3:52 am by INFORRM
Mr Schofield was awarded £90,000 for an article published by the defendant’s which contained various defamatory and false allegations, including that Mr Schofield was involved in grooming children and/or young people. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 12:30 pm by Eugene Volokh
[The motion allows early dismissal of a lawsuit, here the lawsuit that aimed to block UC Irvine from responding to a public records request from the Center for Scientific Integrity (the Retraction Watch people).] [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
Nor does the consumer’s lack of understanding have to be reasonable, and there is no required threshold number of people who lacked understanding.[24] Further, a consumer may have a lack of understanding even if he or she is generally aware that a particular consequence may follow—e.g., he or she may be aware of the consequence, but may not understand either the magnitude or likelihood of a particular risk.[25] Evidence of lack of understanding can include direct evidence,… [read post]
4 Aug 2022, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
”[13]And it is in no small part thanks to this work of repudiation that more people on the left as well as on the right now recognize the hollowness of liberalism’s pretensions to neutrality. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm by INFORRM
There being two legitimate aims, the next question was whether the restriction was proportionate to them; the means chosen to achieve those aim must (a) be rationally connected to the objective and not be arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations, (b) impair the right as little as possible, and (c) be such that their effects on rights are proportional to the objective … (Murphy v IRTC [46] (Barrington J), following Heaney v Ireland [1994] 3 IR… [read post]
31 May 2022, 6:30 am by ernst
Very few people remember, however, the Court's first reproductive rights case, Skinner v. [read post]