Search for: "State v. McMahon"
Results 161 - 180
of 265
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Oct 2011, 7:41 am
On this blog, Orin Kerr previewed the search-related issue presented in United States v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 4:49 pm
“I conclude that there are no genuine issues of material fact, and that the Kirby Works were indeed works for hire within the meaning of the Copyright Act of 1976,” McMahon wrote in her fifty-page ruling. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 1:52 pm
United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003), and Justice Breyer's opinion for the Court does not actually use the word "nasty. [read post]
23 Jun 2009, 4:31 am
In support of its proposal, PIABA cites the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Shearson/American Express, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:22 pm
In 1987 the United States Supreme Court decided in the Shearson v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:22 pm
In 1987 the United States Supreme Court decided in the Shearson v. [read post]
29 Sep 2009, 5:21 pm
State Comptroller Bans Pension Fund Pay to Play - Albany lawyer Kelley Lamendola of McKenna Long & Aldridge on the firm's Pay to Play Law Blog Trial Court Errs In Refusing to Award Litigation Costs but Not Fees to Adverse Party - San Francisco attorney David McMahon of Barger & Wolen on the firm's Litigation Management & Attorney Fee Analysis Blog Tribune Company Sued by Its Former "Watchdog" on Free Speech… [read post]
21 Dec 2016, 5:00 am
" The Court of Appeals determined that New York common law does not recognise a "public performance right" in their decision in Flo & Eddie v. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 4:14 pm
The firm instructed Justin Rushbrooke QC and Felicity McMahon of 5RB throughout the matter. [read post]
9 Jun 2019, 4:26 pm
, Elizabeth A Kirleyand Marilyn McMahon, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia – Deakin Law School and Deakin University, Geelong, Australia – Deakin Law School. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 9:45 am
In the 2009 case of McMahon v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 9:45 am
In the 2009 case of McMahon v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 9:45 am
In the 2009 case of McMahon v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 11:48 am
But now, in the aforementioned Brown v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 11:48 am
But now, in the aforementioned Brown v. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 11:54 am
Many courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have recognized a private cause of action for violation of NASD and NYSE Rules, including a private cause of action for andldquo;the failure to supervise.andrdquo;andnbsp; See, e.g., Cook v. [read post]
5 Jul 2021, 6:03 am
See United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 4:00 am
District Court Judge Colleen McMahon (below right) of the Southern District of New York stated on page 11 that the court was confrontedwith a legal, not a historical, question.This view is a false dichotomizing of the judicial function.Judges cannot be expected to know intimately the historical context of all cases that come before them. [read post]
27 Aug 2013, 8:44 am
” Military Judge James Pohl, who is overseeing the key military commission cases, has set the date for the trial in United States v. [read post]
29 Sep 2018, 4:30 pm
Ms W appealed by way of case stated. [read post]
