Search for: "Abid v. Abid"
Results 3421 - 3440
of 3,746
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2009, 4:00 am
Thus, ideally, the garden leave provision protects the employer against both competition from the employee and/or misappropriation of confidential business information.Though this is an interesting issue, I have no doubt that such clauses are unenforceable in New York.In Matter of Vinluan v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 10:00 am
In Sconfienza v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 9:50 am
" Duncan v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 9:01 pm
R. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2009, 10:42 am
But in District of Columbia v. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 3:43 pm
S.E.C. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 8:13 am
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Kennedy v. [read post]
26 Jan 2009, 2:48 am
While it is possible that the original provisions of copies included permission to publish in electronic as well as print form, it is much more likely that permission was for print only (as was the case in Random House v RosettaBooks). [read post]
21 Jan 2009, 11:05 pm
In 2007, many of the restrictions had been struck down by a federal judge in Alexander & Catalano v. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 10:57 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 8:14 am
Circuit in its FTC v. [read post]
15 Jan 2009, 3:35 am
By Vandana Mamidanna Following on from this week's IP Think Tank podcast which analysed the BMS v Hetero case. [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 12:59 pm
For in Boumediene, the Court is not applying the standard of determining whether a competent tribunal under Article V of the Geneva Convention has been convocated to determine a combatant's status, it is applying the standard of what is required for a court to determine a habeas petition. [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 2:15 pm
There is no suggestion that, apart from the matter involved here, he is not law-abiding and well disposed. [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 2:07 pm
Does the executive branch have to abide by an unconstitutional statute? [read post]
13 Jan 2009, 1:37 pm
NYC Transit Authority v. [read post]
11 Jan 2009, 8:23 pm
It just isn't true. ___________________ Source notes: The Second Circuit opinion is Dolphy v. [read post]
10 Jan 2009, 10:51 am
In fact, recently in Wylie v. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 9:23 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Jan 2009, 8:10 am
In dismissing the cases, the judge recognized that the plaintiffs have suffered injuries from using the defibrillators, but concluded that the lawsuits were preempted by federal law, citing Riegel v. [read post]
