Sentences with phrase «like in a court case»

If it doesn't check out, you should try and refine the understanding, compare more, dig deeper, adjust... Like in a court case.

Not exact matches

The case and others like it pending in lower courts raise questions about how much companies protect the privacy rights of their customers.

Meanwhile, other big digital newcomers to the media scene, including BuzzFeed and Business Insider, have also been slow to take up the public interest banner long carried by the likes of the New York Times and the Press - Enterprise (a small California paper that, as Liptak explained, took two free speech cases all the way to the Supreme Court in the 1980s).

But the revelation this week that Mr. Thiel was covertly backing Mr. Bollea's case as well as others has raised a series of new questions about the First Amendment as well as about the role of big money in the court system — specifically the emerging field of litigation finance, in which third parties like hedge funds and investment firms pay for other people's lawsuits.

The company was hauled into Canadian court because of hyped - up claims, like «bottled water is the most environmentally responsible consumer product in the world» - a classic and transparent case of greenwashing.

«Giving customers back their right to take Wells Fargo to court gives them the power to ensure they are made whole and helps prevent cases like this in the future,» he said.

Like a jury in a court case listening to witnesses, we should ask if politicians in their tweets are telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (or as much as you can in 280 characters).

Repressed memories are NOT 100 % accurate or valid in court and cases like these are the reason a statute of limitation should apply.

We saw cases like McCleskey in 1987 where the Court upheld the death penalty despite overwhelming evidence of racial bias.

In the Roman case, Coontz isn't entirely wrong in calling it a contract, insofar as marriage law would more often than not be adjudicated in the civil courts just like a contract laIn the Roman case, Coontz isn't entirely wrong in calling it a contract, insofar as marriage law would more often than not be adjudicated in the civil courts just like a contract lain calling it a contract, insofar as marriage law would more often than not be adjudicated in the civil courts just like a contract lain the civil courts just like a contract law.

Probably in consequence of cases like this, Paul goes on in I Corinthians 6 to give instructions for the setting up of Christian judges and Christian courts (following Jewish models).

There have been shady cases «out oftown» at tracks like Florida Downs and Hazel Park and at those nasty placesup in New England that seem to court trouble.

Who is David Boies: Boies is a high - profile lawyer who has taken up issues like gay marriage and even argued the Bush v. Gore recount case in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

I do not think he is corrupt (at the moment) but from my point of view it certainly looks like bias.Also I doubt he would want to take the point many people are making (that he cheated) into a court and open what would be a very public discussion.Irrespective of the result the ramifications of such a case would be far reaching indeed and would maybe result in a fair system where footballers and not referees affect the outcome of football matches.

The courts should have to look at the individual circumstances of each case, paying attention to things like: which parent does the caretaking (or both), the temperament of the child, apparent bond of the child to each parent, and anything else that may be relevant and rule in a way that would be least disruptive to the child.

The group say regardless of today's verdict in court, they will continue to fight to highlight the case of this family and the many like them who have been turfed out of their homes.

Automatic removal of the name of a registered voter, who lawfully and legally registered to vote, using an ID Card that the Supreme Court has confirmed was legal to use at the time she registered, is like a dictatorial government divesting citizens of their rights, in this case, the right to vote enshrined in Article 42 of our Constitution, without due process.

Attorneys representing former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, who was also convicted, along with his son Adam, on corruption charges, have — like Silver's lawyers — used the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of former Gov. Bob McDonald to appeal the conviction of the ex-Long Island Republican lawmaker.

The case law regarding aerial surveillance was settled decades ago when the Supreme Court ruled that viewing objects in plain view from the air but not the ground (like a marijuana patch hidden behind a high wall) did not constitute a «search» that cops need a warrant to perform.

In that case, the court found that governments could not force workers to pay for «ideological» political work by unions that is not related to things like contract negotiations.

Maybe because it sounded like most of the other court cases, few took notice of the Catskill Heritage Alliance losing again in state Supreme Court in its quest to delay or defeat plans to build a mega-resort at Bellecourt cases, few took notice of the Catskill Heritage Alliance losing again in state Supreme Court in its quest to delay or defeat plans to build a mega-resort at BelleCourt in its quest to delay or defeat plans to build a mega-resort at Belleayre.

Good government groups are needless to say, disappointed in the court ruling in the Dean Skelos case, just like they were after the Sheldon Silver conviction was vacated.

A United States commissioner specially designated by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia has like jurisdiction and authority in the case of any person temporarily detained in Saint Elizabeths Hospital, pursuant to section 21 - 903.

Cases in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are not quite like court cases in most domestic coCases in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are not quite like court cases in most domestic coCourt of Justice (ICJ) are not quite like court cases in most domestic cocourt cases in most domestic cocases in most domestic courts.

The statement read in part, «The National Judicial Council's committee on the monitoring of alleged corruption cases in court has resolved to actively engage prosecutorial bodies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission in furtherance of its mandate.

Dietl, meanwhile, caused controversy by saying his failed bid to get on the Democratic ballot earlier this year was stymied in part because the judge on his court case looked like De Blasio's wife, Chirlane McCray — who is black.

A New York Times article revealed alleged interference by Mr. Paterson, a Democrat like the mayor, in a domestic violence case against one of his top aides — with the paper reporting Mr. Paterson had called the victim the night before she failed to appear in court.

Commenting on the conduct of the judge in the case, a member of the apex court's panel, Justice Kumai Akaahs, noted in his contribution that Justice Archibong acted like a military dictator.

The National Judicial Council (NJC) Committee on the monitoring of alleged corruption cases in Court has resolved to actively engage prosecutorial bodies like the...

But Ratter isn't taking those charges lying down, and so it may very well fall to Schneiderman to defend his predecessor's actions in court — much like Cuomo did (at least in some cases) with the remnants of the Wall Street cases.

Bills are pending in the Legislature toward that end — to require court - ordered attorney fees when agencies wrongly deny information; to allow judges to order officials to undergo training and report their FOIL compliance to the state Committee on Open Government; and to require them to file timely appeals — within 30 days — in cases like Cuomo v. Robinson.

Courts tend to defer to federal agencies on interpreting statutes like Dickey - Wicker, and the fact that the HHS interpretation has been consistent and wasn't challenged in court until now may weaken the plaintiffs» case.

A famous legal case decided in 1990 by the high court of California introduced the public to what seemed a startling notion at the time: Biological material not only can be patented but, like computer chips or other commodities, can be worth tremendous sums.

The case highlights both flaws in the vaccine court system and fears about what will happen if lawsuits like the Bruesewitzes» can go forward.

It doesn't so much re-litigate her case — tried in real court and the one of public opinion — as jazz up the juiciest details: the «motivational» maternal shit - talk that Janney performs like a profane comedy routine; the on - the - ice outbursts, sometimes punctuating Gillespie's robustly staged skating sequences; and every twist and turn of Gillooly's hapless criminal conspiracy, which turns the backstretch of the movie into a dimwit caper, dominated by Paul Walter Hauser's broadly farcical take on Eckhardt and his mouth - breathing delusions of grandeur.

Still, like any court case, it's all about whether you get a verdict in your favor in the end, and my verdict of From the Hip ends up a positive one, based on its style more so than its substance.

It will be very hard to declare that GDPR compliance is being met from day one as nobody knows what that looks like in practice and will not for some time as mistakes are made and cases are pursued by the Information Commissioner or courts.

Still, the pressure for students — particularly underrepresented nonwhite and low - income applicants — to package themselves like this is acute at a time when «diversity» remains the only rationale for affirmative action that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld, most recently in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas.

While reaching out to fellow Democrats, choice proponents in the minority community have sought to build alliances with Republicans and with libertarian organizations like the Institute for Justice, which has represented poor parents in every voucher case that has come before the courts in the past dozen years, including Zelman.

The NAEP scores they focus on do not correspond in most of the cases to the relevant years in which the court orders were actually implemented; they ignore the fact that, as in Kentucky, initial increases in funding are sometimes followed by substantial decreases in later years; and their use of NAEP scores makes no sense in a state like New Jersey, where the court orders covered only a subset of the state's students (i.e., students in 31 poor urban school districts) and not the full statewide populations represented by NAEP scores.

At least since the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954, this has been interpreted to give the federal government the power to intervene in cases of legally sanctioned discrimination, like the segregation of public schools across the country; to mandate equal access to education for students with disabilities; and, according to some arguments, to correct for persistently unequal access to resources across states and districts of different income levels.

Are courts the best place to address issues about teacher job protection like in Vergara case?

Nonetheless, as part of their broader competences, international courts like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) can be asked to adjudicate in cases of disputes among states, including on environmental issues.

That would mean that the documents like Constitution or Declaration of Human Rights would be interpreted differently in each case and lead to depending on the subjectivity of the court or the judge in individual matters and make judicial assessment as the primer source of the law.

Decades after famous cases like the 1971 Serrano v. Priest case in California, equalization cases are currently working their way through courts in Connecticut, California, Texas, and elsewhere.

In 2002, the school choice movement received one of its biggest victories when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionaIn 2002, the school choice movement received one of its biggest victories when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionain its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionain Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutional.

The CT reformers have been salivating for a court case like this in Connecticut.

After three and half years, much of it mired in controversy over technology missteps like the rollout of a $ 1.3 billion iPad program and a court case that struck down teacher tenure laws in California, the schools chief and the board have agreed to part ways.

The schools have also formed partnerships with community groups and businesses to offer hands - on learning experiences, like building an oyster bed in New York Harbor (at the Urban Assembly New York Harbor School on Governors Island) and participating in a moot court case at Cravath Swaine & Moore (at the Urban Assembly School for Law and Justice in Downtown Brooklyn).

Sounds like something out of a novel, but this is the true story of one of the most famous court cases in the Edwardian era in England.