Search for: "State v. Maker" Results 2301 - 2320 of 4,683
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Oct 2014, 12:09 pm by Schachtman
Of course, frequent testifying can be undertaken for venal or political purposes, and the reputation makers behind Selikoff have been keen to protect him from charges of being a “frequent testifier. [read post]
4 Oct 2014, 4:44 am by Florian Mueller
A renegotiated license agreement is my best guess.Finally, here's the amended complaint: 14-10-03 Amended Microsoft v. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 5:39 am by Guest Blogger
“Necessarily,” the Court held in Washington v. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 2:48 am by Emma Cross
  [1] R (Barclay) v Secretary of State for Justice & Ors [2009] UKSC 9 [2] R (Barclay & Anor) v Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, The Committee for the Affairs of Jersey and Guernsey and Her Ma [read post]
1 Oct 2014, 4:00 am by Martin Kratz
Neighbouring rights rarely get much judicial review so the case of Re: Sound v. [read post]
30 Sep 2014, 1:48 pm
Finally, this book would also serve as a blueprint for foreign Ministry of Justice officials or policy makers interested in adopting the IPEC model. [read post]
10 Sep 2014, 9:30 pm by Ann R. Klee
It should no longer be sufficient for agency decision makers to assume that the only hurdle they have to meet is simply not being “clearly wrong. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 6:20 pm
  While U.S. law appears to have embraced many of the substantive premises of law that contributed to the law of the Institutes, U.S. law makers—courts, legislatures and voters—retained a strong and strongly conservative adherence to its mixed system of judge administered law punctuated by bursts of statutes. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 11:54 pm by Florian Mueller
Apple's patent infringement lawsuits against Android device makers continue to be anything but thermonuclear after a decision that came down late on Monday by local California time. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 12:42 pm
  Where a federal requirement permits a course of conduct and the state makes it obligatory, the state’s requirement is in addition to the federal requirement and thus is preempted.McMullen v. [read post]