0 results for 'undefined'
People in the News—May 21, 2024—Capehart Scatchard, Fox Rothschild
Capehart Scatchard shareholder Ralph R. Smith III recently attended Durand Inc.'s P.R.O.M. (People Rallying Our Mission) Night.DSBA to Hold Name Change Petition and Motion Filing CLE
The LGBTQ+ Section of the Delaware State Bar Association (DSBA) and Delaware Volunteer Legal Services are scheduled to hold a CLE titled, "Primer on Petitioning for a Name Change & Filing Motions to Proceed Under Seal in the Delaware Court of Common Pleas" from noon to 1 p.m. on Thursday.Sheppard Mullin Continues Chicago Expansion With Mayer Brown Partner
Mayer Brown partner Tom Panoff, who does commercial and antitrust litigation, said the move to Sheppard Mullin is good for his practice and clients.View more book results for the query "*"
Summer Associate 101: Focus on Knowledge of Self, Setting
You want to know how to make the most of your summer program. I endeavor to answer that question by focusing on two domains: knowledge of self, and knowledge of settingNew Rule Limits Judges' Remote Appearances in Civil Cases
The rule, adopted by the Judicial Council, was mandated by the California Legislature.Second Circuit Decision Spotlights RLUIPA's Reach, 'De Facto' Finality
The Second Circuit's decision puts municipalities on notice that attempts to delay a zoning decision may work against them when there are religious discrimination claims at stake.Employer Regulation of Employee Political Conduct In and Outside of the Office
A discussion of an employer's ability to regulate employee political activity inside and outside of the workplace. "In the current era of heightened political discourse, seamless social media and hybrid work arrangements, employers face difficult questions as to the extent to which they can lawfully limit or prohibit employee political conduct in and outside of the workplace. Just ask Google…"The Relevance of Pretextual Motives in Takings Clause Challenges
In 'Brinkmann v. Town of Southold', the Second Circuit addressed whether compensated takings for public use may be challenged as the product of bad-faith or pretextual motives under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.