enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledbetter_v._Goodyear_Tire...

    Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. [1] The result was that employers could not be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims were based on decisions made by the employer 180 days or more before the claim.

  3. Rudy Giuliani held in contempt of court for trying to ‘run ...

    www.aol.com/rudy-giuliani-held-contempt-court...

    A Manhattan judge has held Rudy Giuliani in contempt of court for blowing deadlines to turn over evidence in his defamation verdict ordering him to pay two Georgia election workers $148 million.

  4. List of landmark court decisions in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    Under the Accardi Doctrine, federal agencies which do not follow their own regulations or procedures run the risk of having their actions invalidated if challenged in court. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1972) The case established the basic legal framework for judicial review of the actions of administrative agencies.

  5. IRS targeting controversy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy

    Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz took a different view, arguing: "You can't simply make statements about a subject and then plead the Fifth in response to questions about the very same subject," and asserting, "[o]nce you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have waived your Fifth Amendment right." [134]

  6. New Evidence Ties World Bank to Human Rights Abuses in Ethiopia

    projects.huffingtonpost.com/projects/worldbank...

    But the panel stopped short of assigning the bank blame for the mass evictions. Because the evictions were not a “necessary” part of the health and education program, the panel said, the bank couldn’t ultimately be held responsible for them. Kurimoto, the panel’s own expert, thought this conclusion didn’t make sense.

  7. Regulatory takings in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_takings_in_the...

    In 1922, the Supreme Court held in Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon that governmental regulations that went "too far" were a taking. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the majority of the court, stated that "[t]he general rule at least is that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking."

  8. Father goes on the run to escape ‘unfair’ indefinite recall ...

    www.aol.com/father-goes-run-escape-unfair...

    A terrified father has gone on the run after learning he is to be hauled back to prison indefinitely over claims he has restarted a relationship ... adding the recall was “1000 per cent” unfair.

  9. How The World Bank Broke Its Promise to Protect the Poor

    projects.huffingtonpost.com/worldbank-evicted...

    The payments that Lagos authorities offered for larger demolished structures, for example, were 31 percent lower than what the World Bank’s own consultants said they were worth. “It was like David and Goliath. There were these little people fighting against this giant,” Chapman said. The bank “really left vulnerable people on their own.”