Search for: "State v Bell" Results 2761 - 2780 of 3,337
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 May 2009, 9:19 am
  The decision sharpens and refines the heightened standard for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion articulated by the Court  in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog)   Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
13 May 2009, 9:04 pm
Facts This case is one of many involving fake dating profiles (other cases in this category include Carafano, Landry-Bell, Friendfinder, Anthony v. [read post]
12 May 2009, 12:20 pm
" In other words, could United States antitrust authorities have done more? [read post]
5 May 2009, 10:10 am
Bell, No. 07-1114 In a capital habeas proceeding, the denial of Petitioner's habeas petition is reversed where the state courts' rejection of Petitioner's Brady v. [read post]
5 May 2009, 5:29 am
Keeping things focused on Justice Souter, one need look no further than the mess created by his weak, all-over-the-map opinion on pleading standards in Bell Atlantic v. [read post]
5 May 2009, 1:38 am
Shinder, a partner of the firm, write that although certain aspects of the Second Circuit's 1945 decision in United States v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 8:15 am
Lawyers who practice in federal court will likely remember Justice Souter best/worst for writing the Court's opinion in Bell Atlantic Co. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 10:14 pm
 The defense bar hopes that Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 3:40 am
The defense bar hopes that Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 2:41 pm
Later, in a second petition for post-conviction relief, Cone raised the claim that the State had violated Brady v. [read post]