Search for: "Smith v. Phillips" Results 61 - 80 of 227
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jul 2011, 9:55 am by Hugh Tomlinson QC, Matrix Law
Phillip Tillet v The Queen (Belize), heard 9 June 2011. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 1:00 am by Daniel West, Olswang LLP.
Partially allowing the appeal, a Court of Appeal panel of Smith LJ, Leveson LJ and Sir Mark Waller once again dismissed the application for summary judgment on procedural grounds but found against the claimants on the points on limitation. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 12:01 am by Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)
(Kansas) (finding “a right-of-way for railway purposes and that such purposes are distinct from, and inconsistent with, use of the right-of-way as a recreational trail.”); Ellamae Phillips Co. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 4:27 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In [*2]addition, a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, in itself, does not give rise to a private cause of action against an attorney or law firm (see Cohen v Kachroo, 115 AD3d 512, 513; DeStaso v Condon Resnick, LLP, 90 AD3d 809, 814; Kallman v Krupnick, 67 AD3d 1093, 1096; Weintraub v Phillips, Nizer, Benjamin, Krim, & Ballon, 172 AD2d 254, 254). [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 11:50 am by Mark S. Humphreys
Barbara Smith Phillips, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jerry Glenn Phillips. [read post]
26 Feb 2016, 12:39 pm by Eugene Volokh
Begin, 753 F.3d 1, 9 (1st Cir. 2014) (holding that there can be a First Amendment right to film a police officer making a traffic stop), and Smith v. [read post]
2 May 2015, 1:47 am by Ben
The Appeals Court decision in Blurred Lines is keenly awaited by many.More on Billboard here , Williams v Bridgeport Music, Inc, No. 13-06004 (C.D. [read post]
1 May 2013, 5:04 pm by INFORRM
”  Eighteen months later Lord Phillips, giving the judgment of the whole Court of Appeal in Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd, said the opposite: “Thus copyright is antithetical to freedom of expression. [read post]
17 Sep 2019, 4:30 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
(See e.g., Leff v Fulbright & aworski, L.L.P., 78 AD3d 531, 533 [1st Dept 2010], lv denied 17 NY3d 705 [2011] [damages in malpractice case “grossly speculative” where plaintiff could not establish what would have occurred but for defendants’ conduct]; Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Grp. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 4:06 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The allegation that plaintiff would have stopped speculating on the stock at a time when its shares were selling for an amount greater than his actual investment thus depends on “a chain of gross speculations on future events” (Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Group II v Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl, 265 AD2d 208, 210 [1st Dept 1999] [internal quotation marks omitted], lv denied 94 NY2d 759 [2000]). [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 3:43 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The allegation that plaintiff would have stopped speculating on the stock at a time when its shares were selling for an amount greater than his actual investment thus depends on “a chain of gross speculations on future events” (Phillips-Smith Speciality Retail Group II v Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl, 265 AD2d 208, 210 [1st Dept 1999] [internal quotation marks omitted], lv denied 94 NY2d 759 [2000]). [read post]