Search for: "Johnson v. Mark"
Results 321 - 340
of 1,224
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2014, 9:42 am
You can peruse its contents here and read the guest editorial on federalisation and local IP law-making by Phillip Johnson here. [read post]
16 Mar 2007, 10:01 am
Hal-Mark Rental Center, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 11:01 am
In U.S. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
What constitutes a public purpose is defined broadly and "encompasses any use which contributes to the health, safety, general welfare, convenience or prosperity of the community" (Matter of 225 Front St., Ltd. v City of Binghamton, 61 AD3d 1155, 1157 [3d Dept 2009] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; accord Matter of Johnson v Town of Caroga, 162 AD3d 1353, 1355 [3d Dept 2018]; see Matter of Court St. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
What constitutes a public purpose is defined broadly and "encompasses any use which contributes to the health, safety, general welfare, convenience or prosperity of the community" (Matter of 225 Front St., Ltd. v City of Binghamton, 61 AD3d 1155, 1157 [3d Dept 2009] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; accord Matter of Johnson v Town of Caroga, 162 AD3d 1353, 1355 [3d Dept 2018]; see Matter of Court St. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 2:50 pm
From Wade v. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 4:11 am
The Pioneers: First Company Leverages Moxy Vote In this podcast, Doug Chia of Johnson & Johnson and Mark Schlegel of Moxy Vote discuss how companies can use Moxy Vote during the proxy season (here is a podcast with Mark from last year to learn more about Moxy Vote), including: - How does Moxy Vote work? [read post]
1 Jul 2024, 6:45 am
”In its 2019 Bucklew v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 8:09 am
* BREAKING NEWS: someone wants to register 'Je suis Charlie' as a trade mark…and it is not Charlie Hebdo, explains Eleonora. [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 6:00 am
Freed, Center for Political Accountability, on Friday, February 26, 2016 Tags: Accountability, Citizens United v. [read post]
10 Jul 2019, 3:55 pm
(some marks omitted). [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 3:56 pm
Co. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 3:37 am
But this is a narrow exception to the general rule that a person will not be bound by the outcome of proceedings to which he is not a party: Skyparks v Marks, Powell v Wiltshire, Seven Arts v Content. iii) A direct commercial interest in the outcome of the litigation is insufficient to make someone a privy: Kirin-Amgen v Boehringer Mannheim. iv) Whether members of the same group of companies are privies or not depends on the facts: Special Effects. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Auth., 224 AD3d 546 [1st Dept 2024]; Johnson v New York City Tr. [read post]
9 May 2024, 10:00 am
Auth., 224 AD3d 546 [1st Dept 2024]; Johnson v New York City Tr. [read post]
19 Dec 2006, 6:58 am
Flesher No. 94,175 Sedgwick County (PR)Mark T. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 6:57 pm
See Johnson v. [read post]
24 Jun 2024, 12:15 am
In Revlon, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2025, 9:54 am
Johnson highlighted that 2025 marks a decade of collaboration between Global Freedom of Expression and Price Moot, as well as the third year of partnership between CGFoE and Ahmed Khalifa, ASU Professor of Law. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 6:15 am
Johnson v. [read post]
