Search for: "People v. Perez"
Results 221 - 240
of 377
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Aug 2013, 7:16 am
The unemployment rate for working-age people with disabilities in 2012 was 15 percent, compared with a rate of 8 percent for working-age individuals without disabilities, despite years of technological advances that have made it possible for many people with disabilities to apply for and successfully perform a broad array of jobs. [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 4:30 am
O’Connor, Francis V., ed. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 8:32 am
See Mota v. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 7:21 am
There’s three noteworthy aspects of the decision that results, released last week by the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (Perez-Moreno v. [read post]
15 Jun 2013, 9:03 am
Laird v. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 1:28 pm
First, the Perez Decision is in accord with First Department precedent. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 9:15 am
In People v. [read post]
16 May 2013, 9:00 am
In a case running parallel to the infamous Viacom v. [read post]
2 May 2013, 2:25 pm
Paul, as well as a second qui tam complaint pending against the City, in exchange for the City’s commitment to withdraw its appeal in Magner v. [read post]
16 Apr 2013, 8:11 am
[Post by Venkat Balasubramani] Wargo v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 11:45 am
Perez gets 30 years. [read post]
20 Feb 2013, 10:18 am
Perez v. [read post]
14 Feb 2013, 9:20 am
Perez, and another in a case with a pending cert. petition, Lepak v. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 11:06 am
Perez, 994 P.2d 874 (Wash. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
While Kirtsaeng involves textbooks, one of the traditionally copyright protected works, other cases, including the two previous cases involving these provisions to reach the Supreme Court (Costco v Omega and Quality King v L’anza Research), involve consumer goods, goods that we don’t typically think of as within the subject matter of copyright. [read post]
30 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
While Kirtsaeng involves textbooks, one of the traditionally copyright protected works, other cases, including the two previous cases involving these provisions to reach the Supreme Court (Costco v Omega and Quality King v L’anza Research), involve consumer goods, goods that we don’t typically think of as within the subject matter of copyright. [read post]
22 Oct 2012, 9:59 am
See, for example, Campbell v. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 9:35 am
” While Perry v Perez may not have been the right vehicle for doing so, the Court now has before it not one but two excellent vehicles to use for a reconsideration of the modern VRA: the cert. petitions in Nix v. [read post]
18 Aug 2012, 7:30 am
Waco Tribune-Herald by Cindy V. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 11:34 am
Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield, 17 N.J. 67, 75 (1954), to which we owe the motion court no special deference. [read post]
