Search for: "State v. Flow"
Results 261 - 280
of 5,646
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2023, 1:47 pm
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jul 2023, 8:23 am
”Some courts go further, and restrict flow down clauses to items involving performance of work unless the clause explicitly states otherwise. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 2:50 pm
From Wade v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 10:05 am
In Buergofol GmbH v. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 8:55 am
In Meyer v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 1:02 am
Effective immediately, the new adequacy decision allows personal data to flow from the European Economic Area to DPF-certified US companies without the need for additional data protection safeguards. [read post]
16 Jul 2023, 11:00 pm
# # ## # #DECISIONC. v County of Westchester [read post]
16 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
Although the Court did not explicitly overrule Grutter v. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 5:51 pm
All of this is a wind-up to say that, last week, the Maryland Supreme Court ruled on both questions in considerable detail in an important new case, State v. [read post]
13 Jul 2023, 7:00 am
She previously authored The Legal History of the Presidential Management Fellows Program and Hansberry v. [read post]
12 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
United States. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 2:17 pm
And, like it has before, the District Court of D.C. recently grappled with this very question in Ipsen v. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 3:27 am
As Ukraine treats embassies as being part of the “host state”, the marriage had to comply with Ukrainian law. [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 4:49 am
” The original suit, LW v. [read post]
10 Jul 2023, 3:58 am
Also, in United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2023, 8:46 am
In L.W. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 9:14 am
From L.W. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 5:47 am
Washington v. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 7:49 am
—Daniel Akaka 1Aquilina v. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 2:55 am
Although the Court of Appeal was clear, in Neurim v Generics [2020] EWCA Civ 793, that deciding to uphold the lower court’s decision not to grant a pharmaceutical patent PI was based on the specific facts of that case, the Patents Court has subsequently refused two further pharmaceutical PIs (Neurim v Teva [2022] EWHC 954 (Pat) and [2022] EWHC 1641(Pat), and Novartis v Teva [2022] EWHC 959 (Ch)). [read post]
