Search for: "Sosa v. State" Results 121 - 140 of 245
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2012, 3:03 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Defendant states that a successful result in the Underlying Claim could not be established since plaintiff stated that the door locks were functioning properly on the day of the incident and plaintiff did not know who attacked him (plaintiff EBT, at 17, 19). [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 9:53 pm by John Knox
For a couple of reasons, the presumption against extraterritoriality doesn’t apply neatly to ATS claims, as the Ninth and DC Circuits said in their 2011 decisions in Sarei v Rio Tinto and Doe VIII v Exxon Mobil. [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 6:00 am by An Hertogen
First, the US Supreme Court hearings in Kiobel v. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 12:34 pm
  A finding that the ATS does not "apply" to extraterritorial conduct also seems inconsistent with the Court's own pronouncement in Sosa v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 8:26 pm
  The circumstances for this week's Kiobel hearing therefore seems quite different than the context for the Supreme Court's earlier review of the ATS in Sosa v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 6:35 am by Guest Blogger
After this position was thoroughly repudiated by the Supreme Court in Sosa v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 8:10 pm by Marco Simons
After this position was thoroughly repudiated by the Supreme Court in Sosa v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 3:49 pm by Lovechilde
  On the contrary, one of the main obligations it imposes on states is to protect against human rights abuses committed by non-state actors, including corporations. [read post]