Search for: "LEVY V. LEVY" Results 2641 - 2660 of 3,418
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jul 2010, 12:52 pm by Lawrence Solum
Here is the abstract: In Polar Tankers, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 9:08 am by Steven M. Taber
– Trading Markets.com, July 21, 2010 Consistent with Section 122 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2010, the United States lodged a Consent Decree with 163 defendants (each of which is identified in the proposed Decree) in United States of America v. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 10:16 pm by Walter Olson
[Cal Biz Lit and two followups on California decisions, NAM and Levy Phillips & Konigsberg on a since-settled New York case against Foster Wheeler] Subsidies for durum wheat flowed in happy circle for everyone but taxpayer and consumer [Mark Perry] Tags: Alex Kozinski, animal rights, asbestos, Florida, insurance fraud, libel slander and defamation, San Francisco, sanctions Related posts May 7 roundup (3) February 2000 archives, part 1 (0) Wrongs without remedies dept. (1) … [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 2:27 pm by Paul Levy
  Her oral opinion also contained useful discussion of the distinction between commercial and non-commercial use, drawing by analogy on First Amendment non-commercial speech doctrine, and relied on Prestonettes v. [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 7:48 am by Paul Levy
by Paul Alan Levy A recent blog post by Aaron Krowne, castigating the rejection of an anti-SLAPP motion filed by his company ML-Implode.com as "bizarre ruling" and "blatant miscarriage of justice," has gained wide circulation on the Internet. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 2:02 pm by Paul Levy
I had turned down the case when White first came to me, because I myself had already won the infringement issue in Michigan in Taubman v. [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 11:28 pm
Recently, the first opportunity to test the scope of the new Explanation arose before the Mumbai ITAT, in Ashapura Minechem v. [read post]