Search for: "Tompkins v. Tompkins" Results 181 - 200 of 351
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Mar 2011, 7:36 am by Lawrence Solum
Tompkins, a federal court must follow state supreme court decisions when interpreting state law. [read post]
27 Dec 2015, 8:48 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Barnes & Noble 23andMe’s Browsewrap Fails, But Its Post-Purchase Clickthrough Works Anyway–Tompkins v. 23andMe Facebook’s “Browsewrap” Enforced Against Kids–EKD v. [read post]
12 Nov 2013, 1:40 pm
Tompkins that federal courts sitting in diversity jurisdiction should not usurp the function of state appellate courts and predict expansions of state tort law. [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 5:12 am by Rosalind English
 The without prejudice rule was “founded upon the public policy of encouraging litigants to settle their differences rather than litigate them to a finish” (Rush & Tompkins Ltd v Greater London Council [1989] AC 1280, 1299). [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 4:45 am
Limitations on collective bargaining under the Taylor LawCity of New York v Uniformed Fire Officers Asso. [read post]
20 Mar 2007, 10:00 am
Looks like Tops bottomed out.For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please us this link: Tenkate v. [read post]
17 Jul 2018, 7:24 am by Patricia Salkin
Heights of Lansing, L.P. v Village of Lansing, 160 A.D. 3d 1165 (NYAD 3 Dept. 4/12/2018) [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 8:54 am by Venkat Balasubramani
(Coverage of the district court ruling here: “Barnes & Noble’s Online Contract Formation Process Fails–Nguyen v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 7:03 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Google” “Jawbone Plaintiff Can Invoke California Choice of Law Provision in Service Agreement” “23andMe’s Browsewrap Fails, But Its Post-Purchase Clickthrough Works Anyway–Tompkins v. 23andMe” “Vendor Fails to Form Either an Online or Paper Contract With Customers–Kwan v. [read post]