Search for: "State v. Sample"
Results 3301 - 3320
of 4,544
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Jul 2011, 8:52 pm
Kunde contends, the Republican Party of San Diego (the Party) should not have been permitted to include a one-page letter pursuant to section 13305 that — along with a request for contributions — contained electioneering materials stating the Party’s positions on various local election contests and one statewide ballot measure. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 1:44 pm
There's no reason for the state to effectively subsidize the latter, and ample reason for them not to. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 7:01 pm
Its test case litigation efforts have all failed - most notably CCH v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:48 pm
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
Where the proprietor of a trade mark supplies to its authorised distributors items bearing that mark, intended for demonstration to consumers in authorised retail outlets, and bottles bearing the mark from which small quantities can be taken for supply to consumers as free samples, those goods, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, are not put on the market within the meaning of Directive 89/104 and Regulation No 40/94 [= Case C-127/09 Coty Prestige Lancaster v Simex,… [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:58 am
324/09 L’Oréal SA, Lancôme parfums et beauté & Cie, Laboratoire Garnier & Cie, L’Oréal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL and eBay (UK) Limited. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 10:55 pm
In Bryan v UK the European Court stated: 37. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 2:18 pm
Garrido was classified as a high-risk sex offender after he served a federal prison sentence for kidnapping a Nevada woman in 1976, but the report states federal probation officers "failed to supervise him accordingly" despite Garrido's questionable behavior, problematic psychological reports, and dirty urine samples. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 1:49 pm
That’s the question that the Illinois Supreme Court answered in People v Martin, No. 109102, 2011 WL 1499909 (Ill Sup Ct).From People v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 11:52 am
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court decided Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 3:45 am
DeBoer v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:26 pm
As I understand it, this was a report on a crime scene sample referred to Cellmark by the Illinois State Police. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
Back in February, the 8th District, in State v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 2:30 am
In addition, the Supreme Court, in Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 7:12 am
” (Dissent op. at 2) (citing United States v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 7:50 pm
Bell v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 2:11 pm
State, No. 86,692 (Nov. 27, 2002)(affirming denial of motion pursuant to K.S.A. 60-1507); Goldsmith v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 8:20 am
On June 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court decided Bullcoming v. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 10:24 am
The federal district court decision in McKenzie v. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 8:19 am
The recent case of Bullcoming v. [read post]
