enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavey_&_Matthews_Pty_Ltd_v...

    Pavey & Mathews would have received less restitution only if Mrs Paul had withdrawn her promise before the work had begun, but the builders had gone ahead anyway. Also, the quantum meruit (the amount rewarded) could be no higher than the objective market rate for the work, even if Mrs Paul’s promise was for a higher price.

  3. Manrique v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manrique_v._United_States

    Gorsuch took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. United States , 581 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that a defendant wishing to appeal an order imposing restitution in a deferred restitution case must file a notice of appeal from that order.

  4. Paroline v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paroline_v._United_States

    Paroline v. United States, 572 U.S. 434 (2014), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that to recover restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 2259, the government or the victim must establish a causal relationship between the defendant's conduct and the victim's harm or damages.

  5. images.huffingtonpost.com

    images.huffingtonpost.com/2012-08-30-3258_001.pdf

    Created Date: 8/30/2012 4:52:52 PM

  6. List of landmark court decisions in the United States

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

    This case featured the first example of judicial review by the Supreme Court. Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. 199 (1796) A section of the Treaty of Paris supersedes an otherwise valid Virginia statute under the Supremacy Clause. This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a state law. Fletcher v.

  7. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritor_Savings_Bank_v._Vinson

    Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986), is a US labor law case, where the United States Supreme Court, in a 9–0 decision, recognized sexual harassment as a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case was the first of its kind to reach the Supreme Court and would redefine sexual harassment in the workplace. [1] [2]

  8. Philip Collins Ltd v Davis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Collins_Ltd_v_Davis

    The following is an excerpt about the change of position defence at work. The Change Of Position Issue. 76 As Mr Howe correctly observed in the course of argument, “change of position” is what this case is really all about. 77 In Lipkin Gorman (above) the House of Lords recognised change of position as a defence to restitutionary claims. In ...

  9. Attorney General v Blake - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney_General_v_Blake

    The reason of the rule applying to fiduciaries applies to him. Secondly, I bear in mind that the enduring strength of the common law is that it has been developed on a case-by-case basis by judges for whom the attainment of practical justice was a major objective of their work. It is still one of the major moulding forces of judicial decision ...