Search for: "BEENE v. BEENE" Results 241 - 260 of 191,468
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 May 2011, 2:37 pm
You know, the one who set up the A/V equipment and was a whiz-kid with all things computer related? [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 8:32 am
R v Freeman; R v Crawford [2008] EWCA Crim 1863; [2008] WLR (D) 287 “Some care was required in directing a jury when approaching the cross-admissibility of bad character evidence. [read post]
16 Jul 2009, 2:52 am
R v Gore; R v Maher [2009] EWCA Crim 1424; [2009] WLR (D) 240 “The issue of a fixed penalty notice asserting one offence did not relieve the recipient of any possible further proceedings if and when it became apparent that a more serious offence had in fact been committed in the course of the same [...] [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 3:17 am
Regina v Gore; Regina v Maher Court of Appeal “The issue of a fixed penalty notice asserting one offence did not protect the recipient from further proceedings if and when it became apparent that a more serious offence had in fact been committed in the course of the same incident. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 2:18 am
R v JTB (on appeal from R v T) [2009] UKHL 20; [2009] WLR(D) 140 “S 34 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 abolished the defence as well as the presumption of doli incapax. [read post]
4 May 2007, 2:57 pm
Had the drafter of the ATT patent been able to include a Beauregard claim, Microsoft would have been a direct infringer rather than a contributory infringer and would have been liable for whatever millions of dollars are at stake here. [read post]
19 Feb 2008, 4:57 pm
One of the points-of-contention on the New York Court of appeals opinion in Ederer v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 10:13 am by Jacob Katz Cogan
At the Hague Justice Portal, the following commentaries have been posted regarding the recently filed International Court of Justice case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 9:59 pm by Patent Docs
By Donald Zuhn -- It has been just over two weeks since the Supreme Court issued its decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. [read post]