Search for: "Brill v. Brill" Results 201 - 220 of 248
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2010, 11:46 am by Roshonda Scipio
.: Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, c2010.ChinaJQ1516 .K47 2010Democracy and the rule of law in China / by Yu Keping.Yu, Keping.Leiden ; Boston : Brill, 2010.Civil RightsKF4755 .S543 2009Civil rights in wartime : the post-9/11 Sikh experience / Dawinder S. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 9:05 am by PaulKostro
Nowell Amoroso, P.A., 189 N.J. 436, 445-46 (2007); Brill v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 6:57 am by Rebecca Tushnet
In past downturns, we haven’t seen ads like this (v. something staplegunned to a telephone pole). [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 1:04 am
"   Message from Malta: Kmiec Comments on Chicago Gun Case "The dramatic oral argument on Tuesday in the case of McDonald v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 6:58 am by Sheldon Toplitt
Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Dilworth v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 6:58 am by Sheldon Toplitt
Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Dilworth v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46)   India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy… [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:00 am
(Class 46)   India Chennai IP Appellate Board: Well-known trademarks - consumer recollection is key: Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Jai ram (International Law Office) Bombay High Court rules on the infringement of copyright in drawings: Indiana Gratings Private Limited & Anr v Anand Udyog Fabricators Private Limited & Ors (Spicy IP) Is ‘science’ essential for creating patent lawyers: some ‘general’ thoughts (Spicy… [read post]
4 Jun 2009, 5:30 am
"][/caption] Today, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Aventis v. [read post]
9 Mar 2009, 1:21 pm by Paul M. Rashkind
Absent a systemic breakdown in a state public defender system, delays caused by appointed counsel are not attributed to the state for purposes of Barker v. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 10:39 am
Brill, P.C., 25 AD3d 420, 421 [2006]) and failed to allege "separate and distinct" damages (White of Lake George v Bell, 251 AD2d 777, 778 [1998], lv dismissed 92 NY2d 947 [1998]). [read post]