Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

A big polluter sees the light

Article Abstract:

Crown Cork and Seal Co. has been successful in implementing pollution prevention measures while reaping monetary returns. Its new corporate office in Philadelphia has energy saving lighting systems which not only reduce energy bills by 40% but also reduces environmental pollution as well. Electric utilities emit harmful chemicals during power generation, thus, the reduction in power consumption at Crown's corporate office has been estimated by the EPA to lead to a reduction of 1,375 tons of carbon dioxide and 11 tons of sulfur dioxide.

Author: White, Terri A.
Publisher: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Publication Name: Business and Society Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0045-3609
Year: 1996
Container industry, Crown Cork and Seal Company Inc., CCK, Environmental policy

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Implementing Waters v. Churchill in light of the Loudermill pretermination hearing

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court failed to issue guidance on the extent to which a public employer must investigate before termination in order to vindicate an employee's right to free speech under the First Amendment in its Waters v. Churchill decision. This issue has been further complicated by its links with Loudermill pretermination hearing procedures. The Waters v. Churchill case does not indicate that a pretermination hearing is necessary when an employee is believed to be guilty of misconduct which does not involve speech.

Author: Scarry, Laura L.
Publisher: William S. Hein & Co., Inc.
Publication Name: In the Public Interest
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0148-7531
Year: 1996
Public employees, Government employees

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Forgive us our sins: the inadequacies of the clergy-penitent privilege

Article Abstract:

The clergy-penitent privilege does not completely meet the requirements of the First Amendment as the privilege is understood by most courts and legislatures, thus at times violating the Amendment's Establishment Clause by unduly preferencing religion. At other times, the privilege protects insufficiently, offending the concepts of religious liberty and tolerance at the root of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses.

Author: Colombo, Ronald J.
Publisher: New York University Law Review
Publication Name: New York University Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-7881
Year: 1998
United States, Confidential communications, Clergy

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, Freedom of speech
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Truth is the daughter of time: the real story of the Nestle case. Baby for sale; Mich. man tried to sell his daughter,
  • Abstracts: Acting more generously than the law requires: the issue of employee layoffs in halakhah. Guidelines for employee participation committees
  • Abstracts: The idea of public reason revisited. Yes: there is a duty to air a variety of viewpoints. Fiduciary duty
  • Abstracts: Police discretion and the quality of life in public places: courts, communities, and the new policing. Corporatism and self-regulation in the Dutch (agricultural) economy: Statutory trade organizations: Law and practice since 1930
  • Abstracts: Historical foundations of the law of evidence: a view from the Ryder sources. Spoliation of evidence - a primer
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.