Search for: "People v. Payne" Results 61 - 80 of 157
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Mar 2016, 6:09 am by David Markus
Cir. 2014) (member of unanimous majority) (reinstating ex post facto challenge to parole guidelines); Payne v. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 4:32 pm by INFORRM
   This case has probably had the greatest impact on internet freedom of expression (and therefore arguably all freedom of expression) given Google’s pre-eminence as our means of obtaining information on people. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 6:00 am by Administrator
In the 1996 decision of R v Hinchey, the Supreme Court went through this offence in detail and provided a breakdown of exactly what the Crown needed to prove in order to get a conviction. [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]
9 Sep 2014, 1:05 am
A likelihood of confusion between similar marks is not determined on whether people will be confused between the marks, but rather whether the marks will confuse people into believing that the marks’ goods or services derive from the same origin or sponsorship: Paula Payne Prods. [read post]