Search for: "Painter v. Painter"
Results 281 - 300
of 452
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2021, 10:29 am
Differences from WTO’s approach to the 3 step test, which is very formalistic. 10(1) v. 3 step: latter is narrow in scope and reach, whereas quotation can be interpreted broadly. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 3:13 am
Garcia v. [read post]
8 Jan 2019, 11:06 am
Coker v. [read post]
12 Jan 2023, 8:36 am
The German Patent Court’s decision In contrast, Rolex prevailed in an opposition against entirely different goods in the case Rolex v Roless. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 11:41 am
However, simply because Rains expressed his idea before Molea and found commercial success and critical acclaim for doing so, does not mean that Molea or any other painter is forever prohibited from independently creating an expression of crumpled paper in still life form. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 2:04 am
In fact, most nineteenth century painters in Europe dedicated their work to showcasing the importance of light and colour to a painting over brush skills and methodical composition. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 10:41 am
Compare Cheema v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:14 pm
David LaChapelle v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 10:17 am
Painter, Kimberly D. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:14 pm
David LaChapelle v. [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 7:10 pm
***V-J day was 14 Aug 1945. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:14 pm
David LaChapelle v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:14 pm
David LaChapelle v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 5:55 pm
Galerie Enrico Navarra v. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 3:49 am
Turkmen and Hasty v. [read post]
13 Jul 2007, 5:49 pm
See Amato v. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 2:23 am
Some cases, such as MAI v. [read post]
12 Mar 2008, 4:48 pm
Painter from a decision finding, for example, that the original public meaning of the letters of marque clause was to permit Congress to require the entire citizenry to wear chicken costumes on Sunday. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 5:17 pm
Daniel Fleck v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 3:53 pm
The low price and the absence of records proving that Flechtheim received the sales proceeds from Vömel and that he was able to freely dispose of the sales proceeds, make this a clear case of Nazi looted art, according to the heirs’ lawyer. [read post]
