Search for: "STATE v. VIDAL"
Results 221 - 240
of 272
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2015, 4:06 pm
The parts of the DPA claim concerning sections 13, which may depend on proof of damage, were also stayed until the determination of the pending appeal in Vidal-Hall –v- Google. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 4:01 pm
The part heard appeal in Vidal-Hall v Google (hearing to resume on 2 March 2015). [read post]
4 Jan 2015, 9:03 am
The pending appeal in Vidal-Hall v Google. [read post]
24 Oct 2014, 1:31 pm
In 2011, the Commission decided Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 7:36 pm
Pérez-Giménez, a federal district court judge in the District of Puerto Rico, made headlines by granting the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s motion to dismiss in Conde-Vidal v. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 11:50 am
Professor Ruthann Robson, City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law In his opinion in Conde-Vidal v. [read post]
22 Oct 2014, 4:10 am
In Conde-Vidal v. [read post]
12 Jul 2014, 5:42 pm
References The UK case: Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 13 (QB) (Vidal-Hall, Hann and Bradshaw v Google Inc);http://www.5rb.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Vidal-Hall-v-Google.pdf The ECJ Judgment: C-131/12 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González” can be found onhttp://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf? [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 8:08 pm
Apr. 24, 2014) State of Indiana v. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 6:40 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Feb 2014, 5:30 am
http://t.co/plq3gzTcnD -> Costs order in Warman v. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 4:02 pm
The decision of Tugendhat J in Vidal-Hall v Google Inc ([2014] EWHC 14 (QB)) was widely discussed in the media. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 5:30 am
TERIX COMPUTER ND Cali 2014http://t.co/r8N6zDq81Q -> BitTorrent user found liable for direct and contributory infringement PURZEL VIDEO v. [read post]
19 Jan 2014, 5:30 am
TERIX COMPUTER ND Cali 2014http://t.co/r8N6zDq81Q -> BitTorrent user found liable for direct and contributory infringement PURZEL VIDEO v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 7:00 am
In Matas-Vidal v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 5:47 am
Great British Teddy Bear Co. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 4:27 pm
No, holds the 9th, because the state of the law at the time the state court decided the case was Oregon v. [read post]
2 Jan 2013, 3:17 pm
United States of America v. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 12:26 pm
JM Vidal, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 6:25 pm
Aventis Pharma S.A. et al. v. [read post]
