Search for: "Smith v. Phillips" Results 81 - 100 of 233
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
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]
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]
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]
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]
26 Oct 2018, 9:34 am by Bruce Schlesman
Judicial Watch’s amicus curiae brief opposed this radical step because it would harm the public interest, given that so many of the reinstated registrations would be legally invalid because they are associated with voters who are living in other states or are deceased (Phillip Randolph Institute, et al., v. [read post]
26 Mar 2021, 3:18 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
”‘ (Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Group II, 265 AD2d at 210.) [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 9:39 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix
In the Privy Council Samuel Robie v The Queen (Jamaica) will be heard on Tuesday 8 November by Lords Kerr, Clarke and Wilson, Dame Heather Hallett and Dame Janet Smith. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 7:17 am by Andrew Hamm
Subscript Law has a graphic explainer for Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. [read post]
6 Dec 2006, 8:58 pm
Lee Smith, and Proskauer Rose. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 8:11 am by Susan I. Nelson
Smith of Siebman, Reynolds, Burg, Phillips & Smith, LLP to supply an amicus curiae brief on the application of Star Trek, or for that matter, any sci-fi show and its application to Texas law. [read post]