Search for: "Speidel v. State" Results 1 - 10 of 10
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2018, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
This ran counter to the principles in Scott v Sampson (1882) 8 QBD 491 (which states that it is not legitimate to plead or prove in mitigation of damages specific acts of misconduct, even if they concern the same “sector” of the claimant’s life, which in this case was far from certain) and Plato Films Ltd v Speidel [1961] AC 1090 (pursuant to which it is not legitimate to rely in mitigation of damages on the fact that the publication complained… [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 12:37 pm by Schachtman
Speidell, 100 N.J. 368, 495 A.2d 857 (1985).  [read post]
22 Feb 2014, 12:56 am by INFORRM
Plaintiffs suing for defamation seek to protect their reputation – what other people think of them, as Lord Denning (pic) defined it in Plato Films Ltd v Speidel [1961] AC 1090. [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 7:20 am
Lewis, 534 A.2d 720, 722 (N.H. 1987) (patient waives physician-patient privilege to relevant information by putting medical condition at issue); State v. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 4:14 pm by John J. Sullivan
After first precluding defendants from informally contacting plaintiffs’ treating physicians – ordinarily allowed under Stempler v. [read post]