Search for: "State v. Bumper" Results 201 - 220 of 343
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Aug 2012, 2:29 pm
Arnold J stated that, according to the principles of interpretation of EU legislation, Article 110(1) had to be construed in accordance with Recital 13. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 2:29 pm
Arnold J stated that, according to the principles of interpretation of EU legislation, Article 110(1) had to be construed in accordance with Recital 13. [read post]
1 May 2012, 7:24 am by Sheldon Toplitt
So-called "symbolic speech" cases involve conduct through which the actor intends to convey a specific message and the audience reasonably understands the intended message.The concept is familiar to media law students, but apparently is lost on United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Judge Raymond Jackson, who last week ruled in Bland v. [read post]
1 May 2012, 3:22 am by John L. Welch
. , Serial No. 77954696 [Section 2(a) refusal of SWISS+TECH for expandable and compact multi-function hand tools and electronic devices, on the ground of geographical deceptiveness].May 8, 2012 - 10 AM: United States Postal Service v. [read post]
8 Apr 2012, 8:55 am
Of course, there is still that pesky little confusion test for Gucci, which in the Second Circuit is the Polaroid Crop v Polarad Elecs Corp (1961) test (see test here as applied to another famous shoe battle, Louboutin v YSL). [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 8:21 am by John Elwood
  Of the former bumper crop of state-on-top habeas petitions, only one remains:  Wetzel v. [read post]