Communications Decency Act of 1996-Jurisprudence - Judicial Minimalism - Twitter, Inc. v. Taamneh

被引：0

|

作者：

Taamneh, V

机构：

来源：

HARVARD LAW REVIEW | 2023年 / 137卷 / 01期

关键词：

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

D9 [法律]; DF [法律];

学科分类号：

0301 ;

摘要：

引用

收藏

页码：400 / 409

页数：10

相关论文

共 48 条

[41] Defining a "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act -: Corrective measures as a factor:: Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 119 S. CT. 2139 (1999)
Mann, MT
[J]. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI LAW REVIEW, 2000, 69 (01) : 385 - 409
[42] The Buckhannon stops here:: Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Department of Health & Human Resources should not apply to the New York Equal Access to Justice Act
Chan, A
[J]. FORDHAM LAW REVIEW, 2004, 72 (04) : 1341 - 1379
[43] CASE NOTE: A CONGREGATION OF VAPOURS: CLEDENIN BROTHERS, INC. V. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, WELDING ROD LITIGATION, THE TOTAL POLLUTION EXCLUSION, THE FUTILITY OF THE JUDICIAL SEARCH FOR AMBIGUITY IN COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE CONTRACTS, AND THE REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS OF THE INSURED
Plotkin, Thomas
[J]. CONNECTICUT INSURANCE LAW JOURNAL, 2006, 13 (02): : 363 - 395
[44] Constitutional law - Bill of Attainder - Fifth Circuit holds that the Special Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 are not a Bill of Attainder - SBC Communications, Inc. v FCC, 154 F.3d 226 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 119 S Ct. 889 (1999).
不详
[J]. HARVARD LAW REVIEW, 1999, 112 (06) : 1385 - 1390
[45] Proving medical necessity in claims for medicare reimbursement: Eleventh circuit finds a certificate of medical necessity does not unequivocally establish medical necessity under part B of the medicare act- Gulfcoast medical supply, Inc. v. secretary, department of health and human services
Tinkey, Nicole M.
[J]. JOURNAL OF LAW MEDICINE & ETHICS, 2007, 35 (03): : 502 - 503
[46] “Spedidam”WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty of 20 December 1996, Art. 2(e); Rome Convention of 26 October 1961 for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations, Art. 3(b); Intellectual Property Code, Secs. L.212-3, L.321-1 – Spedidam, SNEP et al. v. Apple Inc. (iTunes)
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2014, 45 (3) : 362 - 363
[47] “Entertainment Software Assn.”Copyright Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42, Sec. 3(1)(f) – Entertainment Software Association and Entertainment Software Association of Canada v. Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada and CMRRA-SODRAC Inc., Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic and Cineplex Entertainment LP
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2013, 44 (8) : 977 - 977
[48] Between Olga Chura, plaintiff, and Peter Ballantyne Land Holdings Company Inc., 620148 Saskatchewan Ltd., Prince Albert Casino Ventures, Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority Inc., 621086 Saskatchewan Ltd. and Northern Lights Casino, defendants INDEXED AS: Chura v. Peter Ballantyne Land Holdings Co. Q.B. No. 118 of 2003 J.C.P.A. Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench Judicial Centre of Prince Albert JUDGES: Ryan-Froslie J. [2005] S.J. No. 617; 2005 SKQB 423; 2005 SK.C. LEXIS 754 DATE INFORMATION: Judgment: October 5, 2005. JUDGMENT DATE: October 5, 2005
Ryan-Froslie, J.
[J]. GAMING LAW REVIEW-ECONOMICS REGULATION COMPLIANCE AND POLICY, 2005, 9 (06): : 659 - 662

← 1 2 3 4 5 →