Search for: "Carr, in Re"
Results 221 - 240
of 693
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Sep 2016, 3:02 pm
"Ex-Kansas governors urge voters to retain justices despite anger over Carr brothers case; 'We're trying to be defenders of the process itself,' Sebelius says": Jonathan Shorman of The Topeka Capital-Journal has this report. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 3:39 am
The IPKat posted a report earlier this week of the case Hospira v Cubist, in which three patents belonging to Cubist were revoked by Mr Justice Carr. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 7:52 am
Mr Justice Carr found all three patents to be invalid.The 417 patent:This patent claimed daptomycin doses of 3-10 mg/kg to be taken once every 24 hours. [read post]
10 Aug 2016, 8:40 am
Detective Carr never examined the laptop.State v. [read post]
15 Jul 2016, 4:00 am
You’re in good company. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 4:35 am
À l’opposé, la FECQ soulevait plusieurs motifs d’opposition dont l’absence de caractère distinctif du carré rouge en tant que marque, ce à quoi la Commission a fait droit en se fondant sur l’article 38(2)d) de la Loi sur les marques de commerce. [read post]
19 Jun 2016, 9:01 pm
Re-printed with permission by author: Craig Miller, CPA, CGFM, MBA, Duffy+Duffy Cost Segregation Services, Inc.The recently released Rev. [read post]
17 Jun 2016, 9:16 am
Carr and Bush v. [read post]
7 Jun 2016, 9:24 am
The two are brothers, Jonathan and Reginald Carr, were sentenced to death. [read post]
23 May 2016, 6:59 am
The inspections set forth in this Addendum are in addition to, and not in lieu of, the other inspections of Buyer under the Agreement, and in the event of conflict (between any provisions of the Agreement and this Addendum concerning timing, rights of the parties and otherwise re: inspections), this Addendum shall control.Do you have to go through the above-mentioned diligence process when buying a house or condo? [read post]
19 May 2016, 1:23 pm
And no majority opinion has explicitly held that Zivotofsky I eliminated the prudential factors, though a few concurrences seem to point in that direction (see, e.g., Judge Krause’s concurrence in In re One2One Communications, LLC). [read post]
18 May 2016, 12:56 pm
But even without departures, still need to re-visit organization over time as the market and firms change. [read post]
26 Apr 2016, 9:01 pm
See De Mello v.Speaker of the House of Representatives; In re Brazilian Communist Party. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 7:16 am
Tax exempt status will carry into future years, however the owner must re-apply if the use of the property changes or ownership is transferred.As discussed last week in this Blog by my colleague Connie Carr in her article: Ohio Supreme Court re Analysis of Property Tax Exemption Under RC 5709.121, “when a property tax exemption is being considered based on the owner being a charity, it is not sufficient to show that the property owner is a 501(C)(3) tax exempt… [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 4:00 am
_____________________This blog is presented by Steve Richman, Esq. and Connie Carr, Esq. of Kohrman Jackson & Krantz P.L.L. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 12:31 pm
France’s Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve stated that “we want Euro 2016 to take place in the best conditions and that’s why we’re multiplying exercises to test the systems put in place to quickly intervene in a context where the threat is extremely high. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 4:00 am
____________This blog is presented by Steve Richman, Esq. and Connie Carr, Esq. of Kohrman Jackson & Krantz P.L.L. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 2:11 pm
Finally, in the peace of a Friday off from work, she has been able to fully digest the decision of Mr Justice Carr in Fujifilm Kyowa Biologics v AbbVie Biotechnology [2016] EWHC 374.What is this case about? [read post]
EU General Data Protection Regulation Article 8: Has Anyone Consulted the Kids? – Joseph Savirimuthu
12 Mar 2016, 1:24 am
This headline also reminded me of the case of Re Agar-Ellis ((1883) 24 Ch D 317). [read post]
9 Mar 2016, 6:00 am
From Indianapolis Bar Association: The Indiana Court of Appeals in In Re The Marriage of Carr ruled that the survivor benefit that may go to a spouse in a dissolution of marriage is an asset for the purposes of property... [read post]
