Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 2681 - 2700
of 8,247
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 May 2019, 12:31 pm
("Thus, we join our sister courts in holding that account stated, and not a suit on a sworn account, is a proper cause of action for a credit card collection suit because no title to personal property or services passes from the bank to the credit card holder. [read post]
25 May 2013, 11:38 am
State v. [read post]
3 Apr 2009, 2:58 am
In another case, however, DoJ declined to change course, and instead adhered to the wrongheaded position of the Bush administration.The other case is District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial District v. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 8:26 am
A common one is the absence of knowledge of the wrongdoing, as demonstrated in the case of L’Oréal SA v eBay International AG, where the High Court stated that eBay “did not know that such infringements had occurred and were likely to continue to occur” and this (amongst other factors) were not enough to make eBay liable as joint tortfeasors. [read post]
1 Aug 2013, 10:43 am
Scola, who also presides over the two-way Motorola Mobility v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 6:09 am
But no UK patent ruling has ever been even remotely as controversial as Justice Colin Birss's 2017 holding in Unwired Planet v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 11:00 am
Related Cases: United States v. [read post]
27 Mar 2013, 10:34 am
Qualcomm's amicus curiae brief filed with the Federal Circuit in the appeal of Judge Posner's Apple v. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 2:25 am
Koh's FTC v. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 1:06 am
Zigann's 2018 Qualcomm v. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 6:31 am
T.A.B. v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 9:36 am
Must Articles 17 and 19 of Directive 98/71 be interpreted as meaning that the discretion accorded to the Member State to establish independently the extent to which, and the conditions under which, protection is conferred may include discretion to preclude such protection where a third party - without authorisation from the design copyright holder - has already produced and marketed in that State products based on the designs in question, where protection is precluded… [read post]
20 Oct 2017, 4:31 am
Holder and Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One (NAMUDNO) v. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 5:29 am
Gutierrez (10-1542), Holder v. [read post]
23 Jul 2021, 12:00 am
Since our client resided in North Olmsted, Ohio, her application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. [read post]
31 May 2021, 5:21 am
Since our client resided in Cleveland, Ohio, her application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 12:37 am
Since our client resided in Medina, OH, her application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. [read post]
24 Nov 2019, 9:12 pm
Since our client resided in Chicago, IL, her application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. [read post]
22 Dec 2020, 7:26 pm
Since our client resided in Fostoria Ohio, his application had a better chance compared to states under the 9th Circuit (see Momeni v. [read post]
