Search for: "Marks v. State "
Results 3521 - 3540
of 21,685
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2013, 4:31 pm
by Mark A. [read post]
7 Dec 2013, 4:31 pm
by Mark A. [read post]
29 Sep 2004, 11:19 am
"); United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 6:21 am
The case is Tartan Army Ltd v Sett GmbH and Others [2017] CSOH 22. [read post]
23 May 2016, 8:05 pm
,United States v. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 5:25 am
United States, involving the prosecution of threats made on Facebook, was “something of an anticlimax. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:05 pm
Co. v. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:05 pm
Co. v. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 11:10 am
Their ruling could have ripple effects well beyond California: As Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern have observed at Slate, over a dozen states have laws that are intended to discourage women from having abortions by requiring abortion providers to tell their patients, for example, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer or that abortion increases the risk of suicide. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 6:11 am
B&B Hardware, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jul 2011, 3:12 pm
In NML Capital v Argentina, the question for the Supreme Court was whether one such investor, a New York fund that bought into Argentinian bonds which were subsequently defaulted, could enforce its judgment against assets of the Argentinian state in the United Kingdom. [read post]
8 May 2007, 5:19 am
Bose Corp. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 12:29 pm
Varnum v. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 5:01 am
Auth., 118 AD3d 550, 551 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Sue/Perior Concrete & Paving, Inc. v Seneca Gaming Corp., 99 AD3d 1203, 1204).Because of the retained sovereignty of Indian Nations, the subject matter jurisdiction of state courts “must be predicated on explicit authorization from Congress to address matters of tribal self-government” (Cayuga Nation v Campbell, 34 NY3d at 292). [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 5:30 pm
This is exactly what happened in a case which went all the way to the Ontario Court of Appeal in Kamin v. [read post]
23 Jul 2014, 11:28 am
, Mike Hough & Julian V. [read post]
3 Sep 2017, 9:03 am
Supreme Court dicta has interpreted good faith as having no knowledge of prior use of the mark (K Mart Corp. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2008, 10:23 am
Molloy, stating: "There is no way to put a positive face on the fact that we dropped the ball," Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 11:44 am
Cedar Valley Exteriors, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2023, 5:08 am
As the CJEU held in BMS v. [read post]
