Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 3261 - 3280
of 4,765
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2012, 1:51 pm
Cullen v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 11:45 am
as the California consumer protection statutes have been ? [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:02 am
96/09 P Anheuser-Busch v Bud? [read post]
19 Jul 2012, 6:00 am
Thus, appropriate cy pres recipients are not charities that feed the needy, but organizations dedicated to protecting consumers from, or redressing injuries caused by, false advertising. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 8:46 am
In an era of giant corporate structures, utilizing the national media to sell their wares, the original concern for an emerging manufacturing industry has given way to the view that it is now the consumer who must be protected. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 5:01 am
Dennis v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 12:16 am
In order to maintain the proper balance between these interests, the fair dealing provision "must not be interpreted restrictively" [SOCAN v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 5:09 am
Euro-Pro Operating LLC v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 5:31 am
Fink v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 11:12 am
The First Amendment doesn’t protect a nursing student who violated a promise not to share patient data by posting about a patient to MySpace. [read post]
7 Jul 2012, 2:07 pm
* Facebook is cooking up a new search initiative [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:09 am
Naturally, with the newly formed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau looking for mandates to act and vulnerable people to protect, we can expect more such challenges in the name of consumer protection. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 6:52 am
" Consumers Union, 724 F.2d at 1051. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 12:30 am
– Marcus v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 1:10 pm
(Del Vecchio v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 1:45 am
The new law – Bill C-11 -also known as the Copyright Modernization Act, mainly addresses piracy concerns and contains the following: A provision that makes it illegal for consumers to break digital locks, including copy protection mechanisms on CDs and DVDs. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 3:44 pm
The court did allow two state law claims to go forward: (1) Consumer Legal Remedies Act claims and (2) claims under California unfair competition statute. __ Judge Koh's ruling is extremely thorough and holds the plaintiffs' claims up to some harsh scrutiny. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 5:00 am
Do different ethnic or religious groups enjoy different consumer protection rights? [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 12:25 pm
Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 11:31 am
Rearden LLC v. [read post]
