Search for: "State v. Dominic" Results 2701 - 2720 of 4,510
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Sep 2016, 5:00 am by Jonathan H. Adler
This is all consistent with the dominant Chicago view of antitrust. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 4:43 am
Manara explained the inception of the early litigation against eBay and Google as the high water mark of third party liability in France – Hermès v eBay, Dior v eBay, etc. [read post]
10 May 2016, 12:49 pm by Joy Waltemath
CV 13-03826-EMC, a suit brought by California drivers, and Yucesoy v. [read post]
17 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
Thus, for example, Justice Thomas (in his concurrence in United States v. [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 1:48 am by Sophie Corke
In line with Lord Justice Jacob’s point in Actavis v Merck, the Court of Appeal stated that – in certain circumstances – there is nothing inventive about routinely-taken steps even if the actual outcome had not been predicted. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 2:21 am by Marie Louise
(Patent Baristas) US: FDA’s Chief Counsel, Ralph Tyler, set to leave FDA (FDA Law Blog) US: Docs at BIO: Steve Burrill’s state of the biotechnology industry report 2011 (Patent Docs) US: Counterfeiting: White House IP Czar Victoria Espinel on working with corporations (BIOtechNOW) US: Banning gene patents will promote innovation? [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 3:41 am by Brandon Bartels
State supreme court elections perform as well or better than elections to other major offices in the United States. 3. [read post]
24 May 2022, 4:16 pm by INFORRM
  If a claimant has lied in their pleadings or evidence, they could face contempt proceedings or a prosecution for perjury – rare, but not unheard of (see R v Jeffrey Archer and R v Jonathan Aitkin). [read post]
16 May 2011, 1:48 am by Melina Padron
AP (Trinidad & Tobago) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 551 (12 May 2011) ? [read post]
9 Feb 2024, 7:24 am by Guest Author
” As stated by Justice Rehnquist in his concurring opinion in Industrial Union Dept., AFL-CIO v. [read post]