Search for: "Sellers v. State" Results 3241 - 3260 of 3,701
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Sep 2007, 2:48 am
Sellers, Assistant Director for Public Affairs, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Washington, D.C. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 9:03 pm by Henry Miller
Esposti and her coauthors compared 23 states that have enacted such laws, known as stand your ground laws, with 18 states that do not have stand your ground laws. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 12:47 pm by Daniel J. Gilman
The acquiring firm will expand production at a relatively new facility in State A, but its post-merger plans are to shutter an older, less-efficient facility owned and operated by the target firm, 1,100 miles away in State B. [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 2:38 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
Camuso‘s holding is reminiscent of Congel v Malfitano, 31 NY3d 272 [2018]. [read post]
8 Jul 2014, 9:23 am by John Gregory
The answer to that is generally negative, thanks to the Supreme Court of Canada’s ruling in Crookes v Newton in 2011. [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 8:01 pm by Franklin C. McRoberts
If the valuation date is earlier, the seller may receive and the buyer may pay less for an ownership stake. [read post]
30 Sep 2023, 1:40 am by centerforartlaw
Pareda (https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/seller-forged-basquiats-and-harings-arrested-fraud-charges) United States v. [read post]
6 May 2007, 7:30 pm
The big case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States this past week, at least for patent attorneys like the host of last week's Blawg Review #106, was KSR v Teleflex. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm by Anita Ramasastry
After repeated delays in the delivery of the remaining Bitcoins, the buyer sued the seller. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 3:28 am
[In the following post, our guest contributor Rahul Singh analyzes the impact of CCI’s order in Builders Association of India v. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 12:42 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
Counsel for the Defendant may thus want to point out to the court that the plaintiff has failed to prove up the essential terms of the contract, and cite the Williams v. [read post]