Search for: "Patterson v. US"
Results 281 - 300
of 730
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Aug 2016, 11:49 am
In the case, Parks v. [read post]
12 Apr 2017, 7:16 am
Saba, Stagnaro, Saba & Patterson Co. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 9:00 am
Patterson case. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 9:00 am
Patterson case. [read post]
3 May 2019, 6:51 am
The district court recognized that “no binding decision ha[d] addressed the standard applicable to determining whether a franchisor is an employer of a franchisee,” and “in the absence of controlling authority” it applied the standard from Martinez v Combs, with the gloss of Patterson v Domino’s Pizza, LLC . [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 11:02 am
Malashock v. [read post]
21 Nov 2016, 11:02 am
Malashock v. [read post]
7 Aug 2013, 11:07 am
Ray Patterson claimed that the “statutory right of fair use” is often ignored.1 Professor Lawrence Lessig laments that “[y]ou either pay a lawyer to defend your fair use rights or pay a lawyer to track down permissions so you don’t have to rely upon fair use rights. [read post]
25 Mar 2019, 3:55 am
” In an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal, Michael Helfand writes that by asking for the views of the solicitor general last week in Patterson v. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 8:51 am
” LaMothe v. [read post]
6 Jan 2016, 10:17 am
The Facts of the Case In the case, Galvan v. [read post]
12 Apr 2008, 12:17 am
United States v. [read post]
9 Mar 2019, 5:16 am
And Brian Corcoran examined how Mondelez v. [read post]
9 Feb 2019, 5:37 am
Circuit in the Qassim v. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 8:28 am
The court found that the plaintiff did not consent to, or agree to excuse, a landing strip owner’s breach of its duty to design and maintain a safe airstrip, so the doctrine did not apply.In Patterson v. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 3:54 am
Briefly: At ReligiousLiberty.TV, Michael Peabody notes that “[t]he Solicitor General … has recommended that the United States Supreme Court agree to consider [Patterson v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 6:21 am
If you took the argument Monday morning in Hawkins v. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 8:46 am
Feb. 8, 2010). http://bit.ly/cHHKGY Kwon v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 10:29 am
The Court summarized the law on vested rights in New York as follows: " a vested right can be acquired when, pursuant to a legally issued permit, the landowner demonstrates a commitment to the purpose for which the permit was granted by effecting substantial changes and incurring substantial expenses to further the development" (Town of Orangetown v Magee, 88 NY2d 41, 47; see Matter of RC Enters. v Town of Patterson, 42 AD3d 542, 544; Matter of Lefrak Forest Hills Corp.… [read post]
