Search for: "Bear v. State" Results 3301 - 3320 of 14,844
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2020, 11:40 am by sydniemery
United States: CSLI, Third-Party Doctrine, and Privacy in the Twenty-first Century 14 Liberty U. [read post]
5 May 2020, 6:42 am by Nathan Dorn
This difference is noteworthy because it bears on the history of Jewish Americans’ pursuit of full political rights. [read post]
5 May 2020, 3:32 am by CMS
  Case law has found that a jurisdiction agreement in an insurance contract does not bind a third party beneficiary of insurance who is domiciled in a different contracting state and who has not expressly subscribed to the clause (Société financière et industrielle du Peloux v Axa Belgium (Case C112/03) [2006] QB 251). [read post]
4 May 2020, 3:58 am by Edith Roberts
Patent and Trademark Office v. [read post]
3 May 2020, 8:55 pm by Omar Ha-Redeye
The departure from the American approach appears to have occurred as early as in 1875 in United States v. [read post]
As the Second Circuit quoting Inwood stated, “plaintiffs bear a high burden in establishing ‘knowledge’ of contributory infringement, and that courts have “been reluctant to extend contributory trademark liability to defendants where there is some uncertainty as to the extent or the nature of the infringement. [read post]
1 May 2020, 11:17 am by Scott Hervey
The matter came to the Supreme Court in Romag Fasteners Inc. v. [read post]
1 May 2020, 2:11 am by Shannon O'Hare
  Provided the security agent is a French entity, the commencement of safeguard, reorganisation, judicial liquidation or professional reinstatement proceedings will bear no effect on the assets held in its capacity as security agent. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 12:47 pm by Marcia Coyle
Department of Justice to file new briefs on whether the political question doctrine or related principles governing when federal courts must abstain from ruling have a bearing on the Trump cases. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 9:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
Noting that a subpoena ad testificandum will be quashed only where the futility of the process to uncover anything legitimate is inevitable or obvious or where the information sought is utterly irrelevant to any proper inquiry, the Appellate Division, citing Kapon v Koch, 23 NY3d at page 39, said that the party moving to quash bears "the burden of establishing that the subpoena should be [quashed] under such circumstances. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 9:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
Noting that a subpoena ad testificandum will be quashed only where the futility of the process to uncover anything legitimate is inevitable or obvious or where the information sought is utterly irrelevant to any proper inquiry, the Appellate Division, citing Kapon v Koch, 23 NY3d at page 39, said that the party moving to quash bears "the burden of establishing that the subpoena should be [quashed] under such circumstances. [read post]