Net Deals Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Where are the ethics reforms? Ohio has done almost nothing ...

    www.aol.com/where-ethics-reforms-ohio-done...

    It's been 43 long months since federal prosecutors indicted then Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and four others in a $61 million bribery scandal involving Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp.. And ...

  3. CVS to pay Ohio $1.5 million in penalties over ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/cvs-pay-ohio-1-5-160111806.html

    CVS Health, one of the nation’s largest operators of retail chain pharmacies, will pay Ohio $1.5 million in penalties for problems largely related to understaffing and make changes that may soon ...

  4. CVS fined in Ohio for understaffing pharmacy, risking staff ...

    www.aol.com/cvs-fined-ohio-understaffing...

    State regulators hit CVS with a $250,000 fine against one of its stores in Canton, Ohio, after investigators found that the pharmacy had been understaffed, posing a risk to the well-being of ...

  5. List of scientific misconduct incidents - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific...

    Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in the publication of professional scientific research. A Lancet review on Handling of Scientific Misconduct in Scandinavian countries gave examples of policy definitions. In Denmark, scientific misconduct is defined as "intention [al ...

  6. Unethical human experimentation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human...

    Unethical human experimentation. Unethical human experimentation is human experimentation that violates the principles of medical ethics. Such practices have included denying patients the right to informed consent, using pseudoscientific frameworks such as race science, and torturing people under the guise of research.

  7. Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohralik_v._Ohio_State_Bar...

    Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. Laws applied. U.S Const. amend. Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, 436 US 447 (1978), [1] was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that in-person solicitation of clients by lawyers was not protected speech under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

  8. Ohio Ethics Commission applied 'best practices' in House Bill ...

    www.aol.com/ohio-ethics-commission-applied-best...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  9. Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

    Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".