Search for: "Wood v. Owings & Smith" Results 1 - 20 of 20
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Oct 2018, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
In Caparo v Dickman Lord Bridge cautioned against discussing duties of care in abstract terms divorced from factual context: “It is never sufficient to ask simply whether A owes B a duty of care. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 6:36 am by Marty Lederman
  (By the courts of appeals’ calculations, for example, Conestoga Wood would be liable for at least $95,000 a day; and Hobby Lobby would owe at least $1.3 million a day.) [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:14 pm by INFORRM
On 8 April 2019, spent the best part of a day reading the UK government’s Online Harms White Paper, I concluded that if the road to hell was paved with good intentions, this was a motorway. [read post]
19 Apr 2013, 5:00 am by Bexis
  Thus, the conclusory allegations against [him] are insufficient to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) analysis and, as such, [he] has been fraudulently joined and should be dismissed.Id. at *3.A similar ruling from our neck of the woods (Pennsylvania) occurred in Positive Results Marketing, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 2:05 pm by Giles Peaker
(Following what I still regard to be the manifestly wrong judgment of the Court of Appeal in Smith v Khan (2018) EWCA Civ 1137 (our note)). [read post]
29 Dec 2017, 7:34 am by Ben
In the UK in FAPL v BT [2017] Mr Justice Arnold concluded that the High Court has the jurisdiction to make an order against an access provider that would require the ISP to block access not to a website but rather streaming servers giving unauthorised access to copyright content - 'live' blocking. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 6:40 am by John-Paul Boyd
A few years ago I was doing some work for a professional association on guidelines for dealing with litigants without counsel and I was struck by the extent to which some legal professionals regard litigants without counsel as interlopers who gum up the finely tuned, well-oiled machine that is their justice system. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 7:24 am by Katherine Kelley
Content warning: This post contains content that may be upsetting for some readers. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 3:04 am by Omar Ha-Redeye
Eugene Volokh discusses religious exemptions of a different type, from mandatory autopsies for executed killers in Johnson v. [read post]