Search for: "The Collector v. Day" Results 321 - 340 of 449
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Nov 2011, 9:00 pm
Otherwise, the Supreme Court wrote in its 1992 case Quill Corp. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2011, 4:18 am by Marie Louise
“Canada DMCA” expected to pass (Ars Technica) Liberals on the Copyright Bill: Digital lock rules driven by US (Michael Geist) The daily digital lock dissenter, day 1: The Provincial Resource Centre for the Visually Impaired (Michael Geist) The daily digital lock dissenter, day 2: Canadian Consumer Initiative (Michael Geist) The daily digital lock dissenter, day 3: Retail Council of Canada (Michael Geist) The daily digital lock dissenter, day 4:… [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 7:04 am by Lyle Denniston
  On the same day that the Court denied review of that plea, it granted review in a case raising a closely similar question: Williams v. [read post]
25 Sep 2011, 2:15 pm
Cal. 2010)(unlawfully contacting someone represented a lawyer, engaging in conduct the natural consequence is to harass and abuse, making more than 150 calls, and multiple calls per day) Bowling v. [read post]
25 Aug 2011, 11:28 am by Rebecca Tushnet
No collectors ever refused to buy Seltzer’s work because of Green Day’s use. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 10:06 am by The Legal Blog
Collector, Golaghat and Another (2002) 1 SCC 109 this court reiterated the view that finality of the order of the apex court of the country should not lightly be unsettled. [read post]
17 Jul 2011, 9:25 pm
http://t.co/aQZt38R Casey Anthony defense's use of social media to refine its theories of the case as the trial progressed discussed here: http://t.co/GVagBrk Read Richard Gabriel on "7 simple steps for picking better juries": http://t.co/EF5HDbi; then Darrow on jury selection: http://t.co/PHskqr1 WWII in photos: A continuing 20 part photo-narrative retrospective sponsored by The Atlantic: http://t.co/rS0hW7b RT @actlaw: Take a Lesson from the Casey Anthony… [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:27 am by Don Maurice
A claim that a debt collector violated §1692g(a) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) must be filed within one-year of the first communication, the Third Circuit recently held in Peterson v. [read post]