Nouvelles.droit.org

🕒
RSS JSON
ftc might legal delirium demoted appeared review claims truth force defendants var fulton patent their civil street world policing with cir board was commissioners that law post how mott invention anderson outfit promotion
4 Résultats (1 - 4)
Fulton v. Fulton County Board of Commissioners (Harvard Law Review)
: “[W]here there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy . . . .” Although Blackstone’s maxim has led to efforts to redress constitutional violations, courts... The post Fulton v. Fulton County Board of Commissioners appeared first on Harvard Law Review
Anderson v. Mott Street, 104 F.4th 646 (7th Cir. 2024) (Harvard Law Review)
: There has been increased skepticism of sexual harassment claims, both in the public sphere and in the courts. Recently, in Anderson v. Mott Street,... The post Anderson v. Mott Street, 104 F.4th 646 (7th Cir. 2024) appeared first on Harvard Law Review
Excited Delirium, Policing, and the Law of Evidence (Harvard Law Review)
: Police use of force continues to be a significant problem in American law and society. Recent discussions have focused on doctrinal issues such as what type of force is considered “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment and the propriety of qualified immunity as a defense that can shield law enforcement from civil litigation. However, there has been little commentary on how these and other legal questions might be informed by medicine — specifically, victim diagnoses that might effectively absolve officers from criminal prosecution or civil liability. The post Excited Delirium, Policing, and the Law of Evidence appeared first on Harvard Law Review
How an “invention promotion” outfit demoted the truth (FTC USA Business Blog Posts)
: How an “invention promotion” outfit demoted the truth lfair September 13, 2017 | 11:15AM How an “invention promotion” outfit demoted the truth By Lesley Fair It sounds like there was some “inventing” going on at Florida-based invention promotion firm World Patent Marketing, but a Preliminary Injunction in a case brought by the FTC suggests it wasn’t the kind that unsuspecting consumers bargained for when they forked over millions of dollars based on the defendants’ misleading promises about patenting and promoting their products. For FTC watchers, the opinion is a page-turner from start to finish. We’ll focus on just a few of the claims the company “invented.” The defendants’ initial business model involved online ads that induced people to submit their product ideas. Salespeople responded, telling interested consumers that World Patent Marketing’s “review team” was researching the proposal because “the company is so selective with the ideas they choose to work with.” After a bit of a wait, salespeople calle[...]