Sentences with phrase «about the court case which»

Then Cameron used the judge - led inquiry to avoid questions about the court case which the judge - led inquiry anyway couldn't comment on.

Not exact matches

In referring to 1964, Abrams is talking about the landmark Sullivan vs. New York Times case, in which the Supreme Court established what's known as the «malice standard» for libel.

In its court filing on Monday, Waymo said it recently learned that a former Uber security analyst sent a letter to an Uber in - house lawyer more than six months ago, which contained important facts about the case.

The case against Shrem has been a beacon to bitcoin community businesses warning them about the significance of regulatory compliance and following the rules of the game, which was also a theme that arose during court.

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.

In Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 98 the Supreme Court formalized this premise into a doctrinal test.The case involved cigarette manufacturing, an industry dominated by six firms.99 Liggett, one of the six, introduced a line of generic cigarettes, which it sold for about 30 % less than the price of branded cigarettes.100 Liggett alleged that when it became clear that its generics were diverting business from branded cigarettes, Brown & Williamson, a competing manufacturer, began selling its own generics at a loss.101 Liggett sued, claiming that Brown & Williamson's tactic was designed to pressure Liggett to raise prices on its generics, thus enabling Brown & Williamson to maintain high profits on branded cigarettes.

Among the many notable decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in the area of religion was the 1963 case Abington Township School District v. Schempp, which held that tax - supported schools were only allowed to teach about religion.

And those who care about religious liberty should know at least as much about that case, McCullen v. Coakley, as they do about the more narrowly decided case with which the Court ended its term.

He spoke about the Burden Sisters inheritance tax case in 2006, in which two cohabiting sisters who had lived together in a loving and committed relationship all their lives lost a lengthy court battle to avoid paying inheritance tax when one of them died.

The document from the Equality and Human Rights Commission follows the European Court of Human Rights judgment in four cases about religious rights in the workplace, one of which found that an employee suffered a breach of her right to religious freedom for being told not to wear a cross at work.

Mr Straw has known about the cases, which initially involved Leeds magistrates» court but are suspected could go much wider, for some weeks.»

After the Supreme Court election petition case which stymied the progress of his government for nearly a year, H.E. John Dramani Mahama had three years to execute his infrastructure agenda; and such major projects required about three years or more to complete: and therefore, most of the projects were completed in 2016 which was coincidentally an election year.

In a discussion I had recently about gun rights, someone brought up a United States Supreme Court case in which it was determined that an individual could become disqualified from particular rights.

For another case to reach the European court, a country would have to argue that something about today's ruling was not clear, which will be difficult, she says.

It culminates in an absurd court case which has more than a hint of Gilbert and Sullivan about it.

When I heard about the mayor's remarks to students at MIT, I was reminded of a school finance court case in Maryland some 30 years ago for which I served as a consultant.

Furthermore it will certainly raise the question about whether Connecticut is attempting to walk away from the United States Supreme Court's most fundamental case on education — Brown vs. Board of Education which determined that racially separate but equal education violates the United States Constitution (as does racially separate and unequal education).

Instead of having to hear 5 separate cases, all of which start with, «She failed to control her elephant,» the court can hear arguments about elephant control once.

The article also talks about the Watson case (one of the Tax Court cases I referred to), which can be used as the guidelines for determining the «reasonable» compensation.

A judge recently ruled against the company in one case, saying Warren «fraudulently induced» the family into a contract, making misrepresentations about the dog's abilities, which the court record claimed should instinctively be ready to alert.

Here, btw, is a roundup of previous Cariou v. Prince posts, including readings, reviews, and info about the book I made, Canal Zone Richard Prince YES RASTA: Selected Court Documents from Cariou v. Prince, which contains the transcript from Prince's amazing 7 - hour deposition in the case: Early days of THE BOOK: the five most ridiculous things about the Richard Prince copyright decision The Richard Prince decision?

When I began my intensive search for anything showing the «reposition global warming» memo in its full context, what I found in just the first day was essentially wall - to - wall quotes about Ross Gelbspan's big revelation of it to the world — except for one lone exception, which was a March 13, 2008 US News & World Report article noting phrase was part of Kivalina v Exxon court case documents (more on that separate problem here) which themselves led me to the New York Times revelation of the phrase and the ICE campaign, over six years earlier than any accolades about Gelbspan's exposé.

The idea promotes payments to the IPCC which will defund the ability to do anything about pollution and invite fraud: for which court cases have been instituted for 6 years now.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the United States heard McCutcheon vs. Federal Election Commission, which may become as much a chapter of the history of climate change as it is a case about campaign finance law.

A court case brought about by the US has just started, which is what brings this again into the spotlight.The New York Times and AP both have current accounts of the US complaints, as we have covered here on TreeHugger.

We are also mindful that emerging technologies eventually may change the way in which information — including information about court cases — historically has been imparted.

Posts cover cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and blogger Lyle Denniston also writes a «constitution check» series of posts in which he investigates assertions made about the constitution in the media and appellate opinions.

In a memorandum to district court judges, Judge Julie Robinson, the committee chair, wrote that the model instructions were developed to address the increasing incidence of jurors using such technology to conduct research on the Internet or communicate with others about cases, which has «resulted in mistrials, exclusion of jurors, and imposition of fines.»

The Supreme Court of Canada will hear five appeals this week, including three criminal cases involving driving «over 80» and production of evidence; an unjust enrichment claim; and an appeal in a sexual assault case in which the Court of Appeal of Alberta had found that a trial judge had erred by relying on a stereotype about the behaviour of sexual assault victims.

While the Canadian Bar Association is usually busy intervening in court cases, making submissions to government, commenting on proposed legislation and supporting members, it's not every day that the CBA is called upon to help the public understand the nuances of a pressing national issue which raises concerns about the rule of law.

The issue of the case in P.I basically comes down to the need for the Court to clarify when EU citizen permanent residents can be sent back to their Member State of nationality, which, in turn, necessitates answering the question about the meaning of the «imperative grounds of public security».

The Court of Appeal refused to grant the injunctive relief sought by the claimant and held that the major factors relevant to the court's discretion were: - the extent to which damages were likely to be an adequate remedy for each party, and the ability of each party to pay; - the balance of convenience; - the maintenance of the status quo; and - any clear view the court was able to reach about the relative strength of each party's Court of Appeal refused to grant the injunctive relief sought by the claimant and held that the major factors relevant to the court's discretion were: - the extent to which damages were likely to be an adequate remedy for each party, and the ability of each party to pay; - the balance of convenience; - the maintenance of the status quo; and - any clear view the court was able to reach about the relative strength of each party's court's discretion were: - the extent to which damages were likely to be an adequate remedy for each party, and the ability of each party to pay; - the balance of convenience; - the maintenance of the status quo; and - any clear view the court was able to reach about the relative strength of each party's court was able to reach about the relative strength of each party's case.

The Court was not writing in, nor was it deciding, a case in which it was asked to decide about the complete «elimination of proof of causation».

We have written about the Arizona Court of Appeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love inteCourt of Appeals decision in the Van Dyke v. Steinle case in which the court of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love intecourt of appeals had to determine if a basis to terminate spousal maintenance exists when a former spouse receiving the spousal maintenance moves in with a love interest and is now sharing living costs with the new love interest.

Step 4: Discovery In the Georgia Court system, discovery is a six - month period of time in which both parties can discover information about the case through written questions called Interrogatories, requests for various documents, and requests for the other side to admit certain things.

The first is the wide element of discretion accorded to divorce courts in England about the treatment of parties» assets, which makes it very difficult to predict the outcome in any given case.

This case is notable because the Supreme Court of Canada has granted the member leave to appeal (December 10, 2015, Case No. 36583), which indicates a serious issue about the validity of «administrative» suspensions for breaches of CPD rucase is notable because the Supreme Court of Canada has granted the member leave to appeal (December 10, 2015, Case No. 36583), which indicates a serious issue about the validity of «administrative» suspensions for breaches of CPD ruCase No. 36583), which indicates a serious issue about the validity of «administrative» suspensions for breaches of CPD rules.

It asked the court to tell the jury about that interpretation of the patent (which will now finally happen, tomorrow, as a result of the Federal Circuit decision), and it wanted to point to Apple's own 60 - cent - per - device damages claim over this patent in the Motorola case.

Lawyers need to also take advantage of new tools which development in technology have brought about to work more effectively — lawyers now have access to tools that help make contract drafting and review quicker using artificial intelligence; tools that speed up research time by using electronic law reports, and there are even tools in other jurisdictions which attempt to use data to predict outcomes of court cases using predictive analytics.

The court used this case as an opportunity to clarify a decades - long question about the applicability of both theories to a situation in which an employer admits that an employee's actions were within the scope of employment.

In support of her request for a stay, Teng cited the Supreme Court's recent decision in R.v. Jordan (an important recent case which we've previously blogged about) which sets a 30 - month time limit between an accused arrest and the end of their trial.

(Aside: Only two or three clients left Ramsay after he sent the court - ordered notices; many of Ramsay's clients understand a thing or two about addiction, which is one — perhaps the salient — reason Ramsay handles mostly DWI - defense and implied consent cases today.)

Recent cases have illustrated disagreements between courts about what constitutes the public interest, and the extent to which regulatory bodies can decide about the public interest.

While shedding further light on an aspect of the law seldom visited, highlighting the risks involved in filing documents in a manner which can not be tracked / traced and illustrating the types of complication with which the courts will increasingly have to deal with ever more litigants in person, the case is perhaps most striking for what it highlights about the current fault - based divorce system.

And what about the courts making you pay exorbinent fees to obtain transcripts with which to make your case??

Because of a conflict of interest, the public defenders» office is barred from representing Green, and court - appointed lawyers have resisted the case, which will require at least 500 hours of time, thus reducing the effective court - appointed rate to about five dollars an hour.

The resulting trust was, however, no more than a presumption, albeit an important one, and he recognised that in many cases there would be other relevant evidence at the time of acquisition which would enable the court to find an agreement or understanding amounting to an intention about the basis on which the beneficial interests would be held.

(One limitation in the Virginia ruling is that the Court points out that the cases about which Mr. Hunter blogs are completed matters.

They talk about law from time to time, as in «The Supreme Court Fails Semantics,» where they criticize the U.S. Supreme Court's analysis in Morse v. Frederick [PDF], the «BONG HiTS 4 JESUS» case, or «The right to do process,» in which they deconstruct aspects of the American constitution, or «Banning «rape» in a rape trial.»

-- Courts often seal material, both temporarily and permanantly — Persons can apply for pardons, reversing previous convictions — the Supreme Court recently reversed a contempt conviction against the CBC, for not removing archival copies of information about a case for which a publication ban was ordered.