Search for: "Holmes v. State of California"
Results 181 - 200
of 272
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2023, 6:39 pm
” California v. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 7:53 am
Schwarzenegger, the constitutional challenge to California’s Prop 8. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 4:02 am
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction barring a senior bakery executive from beginning employment with a competitor, finding that the “likely” disclosure of bakery’s trade secrets to the new employer was sufficient harm to support the injunction.Proposed ITAR amendment regarding dual nationals and third-country nationalsWinston & Strawn LLPThe United States Department of State is proposing to amend the International Traffic… [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 7:47 am
See State Oil Co. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2022, 9:02 pm
Hildebrant (in 1916), to Smiley v. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 12:15 am
Weinstein in United States v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 9:46 pm
The case is Brown v. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 4:17 pm
“The Book” is the most widely used and judicially recognized real estate treatise in California and is cited by practicing attorneys and courts throughout the state. [read post]
5 Jul 2022, 9:01 pm
California was one of the most enthusiastic states in this dubious business. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 1:53 pm
Pfizer sought to reverse the First Circuit’s decision by arguing that the decision ran afoul of the Supreme Court’s decision Holmes v. [read post]
18 May 2010, 2:37 pm
In addition, he voted in University of California v. [read post]
7 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm
For many business economists and legal academics, the purpose of any business organization is simply stated: to maximize profits. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 4:31 pm
Thus for example, in a set of phrases that will be familiar to many readers, Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes wrote in his dissenting opinion in Abrams v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(IP finance) The UK IP Office issues a Virgin trademark ruling that contrasts the Israel approach (IP Factor) EWHC (Pat): Article 27 (to prevent parallel proceedings in different member states) requires flexible approach to meaning of ‘same parties’: Mölnlycke Health Care AB (MAB), Mölnlycke Health care Limited (MUK) v. [read post]
14 Nov 2021, 6:30 am
’ Hirabayashi v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 10:36 pm
Cal. 2004), the court followed Torres, apparently without realizing the California Supreme Court had disapproved it. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
We foresee no obstacle to a State’s dealing effectively with this problem. [read post]
19 Jun 2007, 9:15 am
McDonald, UNSECURED CLAIMS FOR CONTRACT-BASED ATTORNEY'S FEES: FOBIAN IS DEAD, BUT DOES JUSTICE HOLMES' DECISION IN RANDOLPH & RANDOLPH v. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 9:01 pm
United States, 250 U.S. 616,630 (1919) (Holmes, J., dissenting).] [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 6:12 pm
The US Third Circuit Court of Appeals, covering New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Delaware, recently released a decision in the case of Prowel v. [read post]
