Search for: "Johnson v. Mark"
Results 201 - 220
of 1,224
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
” Young, 291 N.C. at 568, 231 S.E.2d at 581 (quotation marks, emphasis, and citation omitted); see Godinez v. [read post]
29 Sep 2004, 11:19 am
Cotton, 535 U.S. at 631-32 (quoting Johnson v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 7:25 pm
. #37-2013-00069903-CU-PO-CTLCase Name: BEVERLY JOHNSON V. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Mark Gaston Pearce (D), originally appointed to the Board in 2010, was re-appointed to the Board and will serve as Chairman. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 7:25 pm
. #37-2013-00069903-CU-PO-CTLCase Name: BEVERLY JOHNSON V. [read post]
28 Feb 2018, 6:15 pm
Supreme Court oral argument in United States v. [read post]
20 Nov 2024, 4:00 am
In Johnson v. [read post]
7 Dec 2019, 9:00 pm
A post over at In Custodia Legis marks "Finland’s Independence Day and the Finnish Constitution of 1919. [read post]
25 May 2015, 4:15 am
Ltd [on which see the IPKat's earlier post here], a trade mark dispute concerning a Community trade mark resembling a knife-handle.* Do you value an invitation to the UPC court fees consultation event? [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 6:06 am
What about fair use of the trade mark? [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 3:59 am
Johnson). [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 12:45 pm
In Brnovich v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 4:41 pm
” A v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] 1 AC 68, Lord Bingham. [read post]
31 Jul 2022, 8:44 am
Wade, including Boris Johnson, Macron, Trudeau, and ... [read post]
5 Apr 2010, 9:00 pm
Johnson, 446 F.3d 272 (2nd Cir. 2006); United States v. [read post]
25 Aug 2016, 4:45 am
” Briefly: At his Election Law Blog, Rick Hasen reports on the latest developments in Shapiro v. [read post]
18 Jun 2011, 6:00 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 11:20 am
As we’ve previously mentioned, the Supreme Court has set oral argument in Perry v. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 9:38 am
Basically, the court has to explain why Mark Zuckerberg isn’t engaged in state action. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 9:39 pm
The question marks above are not rhetorical. [read post]
