Search for: "Sullivan v. Sullivan*" Results 2741 - 2760 of 4,162
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Mar 2022, 4:02 pm by INFORRM
Lawyers representing Shazam, the company set up by the original show’s creator John Sullivan prior to his death in 2011, accuse the theatre production company of tricking customers into thinking it was an officially endorsed product. [read post]
24 Feb 2019, 4:23 pm by INFORRM
Blog Law Online has a post “Is New York Times v Sullivan in danger? [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 2:47 am
Sullivan, 978 F.2d 560, 562-63 (9th Cir. 1992); Biotics Research Corp. v. [read post]
23 May 2022, 3:58 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  They sue their personal injury law firm in Marinelli v Sullivan Papain Block McGrath & Cannavo, P.C. [read post]
2 May 2019, 10:48 am
Guzior (Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York) commented that since SAS he had already seen parties coming up with highly creative arguments as to why prior art should still be allowed into court proceedings. [read post]
22 Jun 2019, 6:54 pm by Eugene Volokh
For these reasons, we conclude that the temporary restraining order, as well as the permanent injunction restraining Sullivan's speech, constitute unconstitutional prior restraints in derogation of Sullivan's right to speak. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 2:51 pm by Anthony Lake
District Judge Emmet Sullivan appointed a special prosecutor to investigate what he called the worst misconduct he had seen in nearly 25 years on the bench. [read post]
24 May 2012, 5:41 am by Administrator
May 24, 2010 – The United States Supreme Court decides Hardt v. [read post]
13 May 2007, 6:01 pm
The big news tomorrow today is going to be oral argument scheduled before the Supreme Court in Elizabeth Kerrigan et al. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 2:26 pm by Matt Danzer
The morning’s proceedings begin with a return to Al-Nashiri’s alleged role in the attack on the French oil tanker the M/V Limburg in Yemen in October 2002. [read post]
27 May 2014, 4:58 pm by Wells Bennett
Mark Martins, had this to say on the eve of a pre-trial motions hearing in United States v. [read post]