Search for: "Deter v. Deter"
Results 3181 - 3200
of 5,290
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Oct 2012, 4:12 am
Res Judicata ‘trick’ In Brafman v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 4:12 am
Res Judicata ‘trick’ In Brafman v. [read post]
17 Oct 2012, 3:08 am
Any such award would be aimed at punishing the wrongdoer and deterring similar conduct by others (see Laurie Marie M. v Jeffrey T.M., 159 AD2d 52, 59 [2d Dept 1990], affd 77 NY2d 981 [1991]; Peters v Newman, 115 AD2d 816, 817 [3d Dept 1985], appeal dismissed 67 NY2d 916 [1986]; see also Le Mistral, Inc. v Columbia Broadcasting Sys., 61 AD2d 491, 494 [1st Dept 1978], appeal dismissed 46 NY2d 940 [1979] [citing 14 NY Jur, Damages, § 176 for proposition that… [read post]
15 Oct 2012, 8:13 am
The Federal crime of Money Laundering is traditionally understood to be the practice of filtering “dirty” money, or ill-gotten gains, through a series of transactions until the funds are “clean,” or appear to be proceeds from legal activities. [read post]
10 Oct 2012, 7:54 am
Fraudulent Inducement Claims Rejected by CourtIn Shareholder Buyout Dispute The broad release language contained in a buyout agreement is enforced, despite claims of fraudulent inducement, affirms the Appellate Division of Superior Court in Marino v. [read post]
5 Oct 2012, 12:58 pm
In what is certain to be the first step in a very important precedent, the Tax Court of Canada held on October 2, 2012 that the advisor penalties created under section 163.2 of the Income Tax Act constitute criminal offences and entitle the taxpayer to all of the constitutional protections that entails, including a standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt: Guindon v. [read post]
5 Oct 2012, 9:28 am
In the final days of its September term, the Illinois Supreme Court allowed a petition for review in Standard Mutual Insurance Co. v. [read post]
4 Oct 2012, 4:39 pm
The court ruled in Marsh v. [read post]
2 Oct 2012, 11:37 am
" This type of evidence, arguably irrelevant to what the allegations say, illustrates motive to pursue a competitor not for the hopes of winning a suit, but simply to deter competition altogether.Portola Packaging v. [read post]
28 Sep 2012, 7:45 am
As the existence of the rule of law deters illegal activities, anti-subsidy rules and countervailing duty laws reduce the incentives to subsidize in the first place. [read post]
28 Sep 2012, 5:53 am
Did the court of appeals err in upholding a method claim by Myriad that is irreconcilable with this Court’s ruling in Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. [read post]
27 Sep 2012, 2:49 pm
I rely entirely on John Marsh of Hahn Loeser to provide details on one of the year's most important competition cases, American Chemical Society v. [read post]
14 Sep 2012, 4:42 am
State v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 7:41 pm
Airways, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 8:25 am
The jury may also find that defendants' response to these complaints was "clearly unreasonable" (the legal standard in these cases) because they did nothing about it, i.e., they did not do anything to stop or deter the harassment or undertake a full investigation. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 4:58 am
Great Reasons to Adopt ERP Solutions on the Cloud – http://bit.ly/PLedtB (Rashed Khan) Copyright – Customs and Border Protection – Lego v Best-Lock – http://bit.ly/POiNaq (Sue Ross) Cyberlockers, File-Sharing, and Infringement in the Cloud – http://bit.ly/QEQ0b6 (Richard Raysman, Peter Brown) Data-Driven Discovery Is Tech’s New Wave – http://nyti.ms/PXdyFF (Steve Lohr) Employers Must Consider Social Media Risks to Life and Limb, Not Just Pocketbook… [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:52 am
(Expression v. traditional advertising may have something to do with the differences here—NFU is problematic perhaps because it spans both types of uses, whereas Rogers is for expression that isn’t standard advertising.) [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 2:50 am
" Without further comment, here is Breytman v Schechter ; 2011 NY Slip Op 51375(U) ; Supreme Court, Kings County Schack, J. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 2:59 am
Here is the abstract: In Kansas v Hendricks, the Supreme Court held that it did not violate double jeopardy or substantive due process to commit a person indefinitely to a locked state-run facility after he had completed his maximum prison sentence. [read post]
8 Sep 2012, 9:17 pm
See Katz v. [read post]
