Search for: "Doe Defendants 1-50"
Results 121 - 140
of 4,011
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Oct 2013, 6:00 am
Henderson argues in particular that sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 13 of Bill 99 are contrary to the procedures for amending the Constitution of Canada as provided in the Constitution Act, and the government may not rely on a 50-percent-plus-one-vote to declare Quebec’s independence from Canada. [read post]
4 Apr 2010, 12:25 pm
The defendant’s oath as a police officer to defend and obey the laws of New Jersey, in of itself, does not make him strictly liable for official misconduct for all crimes he may commit. [read post]
7 May 2024, 9:47 am
In other words, the court must find the defendant does not have A, does not have B, and does not have C. [read post]
25 Sep 2012, 9:06 am
However, even as of today, this Arbitration Award does not appear on Ms. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 9:33 am
{The complaint does not allege that defendant failed to comply with the settlement agreement.} [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 9:33 am
{The complaint does not allege that defendant failed to comply with the settlement agreement.} [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 5:08 am
§ 2615(a)(1) (emphasis added). [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 6:25 am
The Court held that Rule 32 does not provide for broad discovery of presentence materials, and that even if it did, Kluger had done no more than speculate as to the existence of such materials.Reasonableness of Sentence: (1) Procedural Reasonableness. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 11:06 pm
The court was unsure whether the shape of the mounting device affected the origin function of Audi’s trade mark and, if so, whether the defendant could rely on Art. 14(1)(c) EUTMR. [read post]
4 Oct 2012, 2:59 pm
Section 50-e (1) requires that the notice be served within 90 days after the claim arises. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 7:44 pm
However, the language of Civil Rights Law § 50-b does not exist in a vacuum. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 12:22 pm
And how does it work in California? [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 8:43 pm
And that his also showed that the defendant no. 1 was very well aware of the plaintiff’s rights over the trade name and service mark TATA INFOTECH. [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 9:36 am
§ 1114(1)) • Count III: Federal Unfair Competition (15 U.S.C. [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
(PROCEEDING/ACTION NO. 1.) [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
(PROCEEDING/ACTION NO. 1.) [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 8:17 pm
The courts in that county allowed potential jurors the oppotunity to avoid jury duty by paying $50 and performing community service. [read post]
12 Aug 2015, 5:00 am
Armstrong,50 Cal. [read post]
6 Jul 2014, 1:04 pm
1-800-579-9864. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 2:24 pm
In this case, the InterDigital complaint asserts the defendants are infringing U.S. [read post]
