Search for: "Post v. Pearson"
Results 141 - 160
of 322
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Nov 2013, 4:00 am
A finding of 100% contributory negligence should never be made: see Part III.G.i. [13] Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (UK), SI 1998/3132, r 44.3(2)(a). [14] Onay v Brown [2009] EWCA Civ 775; Sonmez v Kebabery Wholesale Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1386. [15] Maes Finance Ltd v AL Phillips & Co (1997) The Times, 25 March (Ch D); Lunnun v Singh (1999) The Times, 19 July (CA). [16] See, eg, Pankhurst v White [2006] EWHC 2093 (QB). [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
In FTC v. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 9:00 am
Vanessa Absher, Lynda Mitchell and United States of America v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 4:05 am
Farnan v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 8:10 am
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2013)In 2010, the faculty at Penn State Law approved the creation of a new concept course, to be named "Elements of Law". [read post]
11 Aug 2013, 5:30 am
Think Twice Before Removing the Copyright Notice–It Could breach the DMCA http://t.co/mtoUDG7iSL -> Delhi HC dismisses http://t.co/opHBnyh3Wa's Copyright Infringement plea after Trial http://t.co/nWwAkWDU6j -> Facebook Posting That Someone Has Herpes Is Criminal Harassment–Pennsylvania v. [read post]
8 Jul 2013, 6:22 am
-M.Th.D. ten Napel, Leiden Law School, Institute for Public Law, Section of Constitutional and Administrative Law, The Netherlands, “Religious Pluralism, Eastern Ethnical Monism and Western ‘Civic Totalism’” Nicolae V. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 6:42 am
” At PrawfsBlawg, Kim Pearson writes about family law issues in response to comments on her series of posts (covered in both Monday’s and Tuesday’s round-ups) with Addie Rolnick on last week’s decision in Adoptive Couple v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 4:04 pm
In response to some of the comments received on our series about the Baby Girl case (posted on Prawfs earlier this week; the final post, with links to the others, is here), my co-author Kim Pearson addresses some of the family law issues: Our original posts elided the issue of the mother’s rights to make decisions about the child, and several of the comments pointed out her invisibility. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 7:32 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Cynthia Godsoe and Kim Pearson posted the last part of a four-part series discussing the decision. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 7:36 am
At PrawfsBlawg, Cynthia Godsoe and Kim Pearson discuss last week’s decision in Adoptive Couple v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 11:17 pm
Nebraska and Pierce v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm
Biology v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 12:17 am
(Similar concerns surrounded the use of ancestry in Rice v. [read post]
29 Jun 2013, 12:12 am
During my last guest stint here, I addressed this phenomenon in posts about the widely-debated Santa Clara Pueblo v. [read post]
6 May 2013, 5:38 am
There were a handful of resolved cases reported: Full Fact v The Sun, Clause 1, 06/05/2013; Mr David Murray v Sutton Guardian, Clause 1, 03/05/2013; A woman v The Sun on Sunday, Clause 9, 03/05/2013; and Dr Carol Uren v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 03/05/2013. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 9:36 am
‘, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly April 11, 2013 [Abstract] Digital Media Law Project, Berkman Center: We Have a New Name Professor Patrick Keyzer (lead author), Jane Johnston, Sharon Rodrick, Anne Wallace, Geoff Holland and Mark Pearson. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 11:54 am
and Sir Michael Briggs (he of the Case of the Pixelated Privates and, more recently, involved in the Fage v Chobani Greek yoghurt litigation, here and here, and on which a further post is expected soon) and Dame Elizabeth Gloster (Pearson Education v Prentice Hall of India, here). [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 10:23 am
Eric Goldman explains well in this 2009 post about another case Pearson and other publishers brought at the same time, Pearson Education, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2013, 10:22 pm
Ashby Donald and othrs. v. [read post]
