Moot Court
45th Annual ROBERT F. WAGNER NATIONAL LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION
... Students and Faculty of New York Law School and the Association prepared the Record, which is copyrighted by the New York Law School Moot Court Association. Except as otherwise provided, reproductions of ...
16
FRANK A. SCHRECK GAMING LAW MOOT COURT COMPETITION
... Law Moot Court Competition is co-sponsored by the William ...Advocates Moot Court Competition Team and the UNLV Gaming Law ...Law Moot Court ...
10
The Twenty-Ninth Annual John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for Petitioner, 28 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 119 (2010)
... In determining the essential terms of a contract, courts look to the parties’ shared intent at the time they signed the contract. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 201 (1981). While one party to an agreement may ...
33
The Twenty-Ninth Annual John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 28 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 81 (2010)
... the Church of Primary Saints his comments on radio and television ex- pressed and promoted his Church’s principles and values but these ac- tions are not enough to turn him into a public figure, nor do they constitute an ...
39
1995 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 14 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 563 (1996)
... The trial court held that Jacobs was subject to personal jurisdiction in the State of Marshall under the Marshall long-arm statute. at 5.) As to Jacobs claim that Jennife[r] ...
95
1997 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 16 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 685 (1998)
... Petitioner contends that the Marshall Internet Child Protection Act violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment by mandating the installation and use of fil[r] ...
93
2017 National Environmental Moot Court Competition Problem
... Supreme Court has, in its more recent takings cases, rejected so-called “conceptual sever- ance” arguments that would apply a takings analysis to just one portion of a combined ...
18
1998 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 17 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 643 (1999)
... Section 2701 of the ECPA permits a court to hold Magnum liable to June Harper if it (1) intentionally accessed a stored wire or electronic communication (2) without [r] ...
79
The Twenty-Ninth Annual John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for Respondent, 28 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 151 (2010)
... In the instant case, Appellant’s claim for false light invasion of pri- vacy fails because being misidentified as Billie Who’s birth father, al- though unfavorable, did not rise to the egregious level required to be ...
35
1999 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 18 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 181 (1999)
... HackLibrary maintains a website containing "hacker news and information." (R. As such, the number of visitors to HackLibrary, a specialized site, is logically smal[r] ...
95
2000 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 19 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 207 (2000)
... Ms. Arbeiter did not waive her right to privacy by providing limited information to EmployExpert.com through its Internet services. Arbeiter provided her information for [r] ...
89
2001 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 20 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 91 (2001)
... affirmed summary judgment in favor of the Defendant. On the first count of invasion of false light privacy, the Court of Ap- peals found that the Defendant had no knowle[r] ...
103
2002 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for the Petitioner, 21 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 59 (2002)
... The First District Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Haul n' Ride. The court of appeals de- termined that Alazork failed t[r] ...
105
2002 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 21 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 37 (2002)
... The First District Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Haul n' Ride. The court of appeals de- termined that Alazork failed t[r] ...
105
2003 John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 22 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 247 (2003)
... STATUTORY AND RESTATEMENT PROVISIONS ... THE COURT OF APPEALS CORRECTLY AFFIRMED THE DECISION THAT PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER DOSPAM WAS PROPER BECAUSE THE EXERCISE OF[r] ...
129
2004 John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for the Respondent, 23 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 633 (2005)
... The First District Court of Appeals of the State of Marshall affirmed the trial court's quashing of the Plaintiff-Appellant's subpoena of the identity and medical records [r] ...
97
2005 John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Bench Memorandum, 24 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 69 (2005)
... The trial court properly granted summary judgment on all four counts because Appellee failed to show any genuine issue of material fact, even when the evidence is [r] ...
109
2009 John Marshall Law School International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for the Respondent, 27 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 169 (2009)
... district court in the Northern District of Illi- nois recently explained what was required to raise a genuine issue of material fact on the intrusion element when the defendant did not physi- cally enter the ...
31
The Twenty-Sixth Annual John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for the Respondent, 25 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 371 (2008)
... NESBIT'S ALLEGED INTRUSION ... THE APPELLATE COURT PROPERLY AFFIRMED THAT CONDEVEL WAS EXEMPT FROM THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT OF MARSHALL'S DATA PROTECTION ACT ... DISC[r] ...
39
The Twenty-Sixth Annual John Marshall International Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law: Brief for the Petitioner, 25 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 337 (2008)
... STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND REGULATIONS INVOLVED.. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ... NESBIT INTRUDED UPON BAYLOR'S SECLUSION WHEN HE INSTALLED A KEYLOGGER PROGRAM ON BAYLOR'S WORKP[r] ...
35