Search for: "BELL v. BELL"
Results 3041 - 3060
of 5,135
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Feb 2013, 4:00 am
" Citing a number of decisions including Chambers v Board of Educ. of Lisbon Cent. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 10:02 am
United States v. [read post]
1 May 2014, 7:19 pm
(We'll see what the Supreme Court of Canada ultimately has to say about this practice in R v Spencer heard in December of last year.) [read post]
18 Feb 2013, 5:01 am
., BRT, A Tax Agency Rises from the Dead, and Tax Law as Subterfuge: Best Use Valuation v. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 5:55 pm
Unifund CCR Partners v. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 1:47 pm
Said Robin, the average consumer is "the top part of the bell curve".At this point Allan Rosas returned to the discussion, broadly endorsing the comments of Paul and Robin. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 5:01 am
., BRT, A Tax Agency Rises from the Dead, Tax Law as Subterfuge: Best Use Valuation v. [read post]
17 May 2016, 5:17 am
Barry also mentions some important historic precedent, like Buck v. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 9:30 pm
New Jersey Bell and the Tragedy of Workplace SmokingSarah E. [read post]
19 Oct 2016, 1:26 am
The General Court ultimately rejected the appeal.While the case is by no means revolutionary, it does illustrate a need to be careful in the choice of marks for specific goods, especially when the depiction could be closely linked to the goods at hand (by way of example, a bar bell could've just as well been descriptive here). [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 5:01 am
., BRT, A Tax Agency Rises from the Dead, and Tax Law as Subterfuge: Best Use Valuation v. [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 11:07 am
The case — Morgan v. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 6:09 am
If you are considering a Rule 54(b) appeal, a good case at bar is Bell Microproducts, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 7:59 am
PSC v. [read post]
19 May 2018, 1:30 pm
Bell Supply Co, LLC v. [read post]
9 May 2017, 4:59 am
Bell (1977). [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 10:37 pm
Bell (1927) (sterilization). [read post]
17 Nov 2021, 10:58 am
Petitioner Robyn Morgan got happy news: the Justices decided they wanted Taco Bell — or, at least, they wanted to hear that Taco Bell employee’s petition in Morgan v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 1:29 am
The first, Godfrey v Demon Internet ([2001] EWHC QB 201) and the second, Bunt v Tilley ([2006] EWHC 407 (QB)) involved the liability of ISPs, the third Metropolitan International Schools Limited v Design Technica Corp. ([2009] EWHC 1765 (QB)), the liability of Google for results generated by its search engine. [read post]
18 Sep 2007, 4:34 am
The lien is imposed on the client's cause of action, in whatever form it may take during the course of litigation, and follows the proceeds, wherever they may be found (see Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell, 81 NY2d 655, 658 [1993]). [read post]
