Search for: "Green v. Superior Court" Results 341 - 360 of 530
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Oct 2011, 6:02 pm by Contributor
”[21] The Panel explains that this formulation is desirable because it will provide the courts and litigants with notice of appropriate uses of the legislation, and by doing so, it will deter litigation that does not fall within the appropriate uses.[22] As well, a purpose clause will help litigants differentiate between SLAPPs and non-SLAPPs, the latter of which is subject to the limited remedies for traditional civil actions.[23] An effective purpose clause plays the crucial roles… [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 2:25 pm by Myriam Gilles
”  Applying this precept, the Supreme Court in Green Tree Financial Corp. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 5:08 pm by INFORRM
Doe, 2011 ONSC 4663 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered an anonymous blogger sued by a defendant in the Lawbuzz defamation case to reveal his or her identity. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 11:00 pm by Rosalind English
But in immigration and asylum cases these qualitative comparisons are made all the time, otherwise there would have been no development of the line of case law under Article 3 that stretches from D v United Kingdom in 1995 to Limbuela v Home Secretary in 2005, all of which hinge on lack of adequate medical care abroad. [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 10:36 pm by Marie Louise
(Docket Report) District Court Minnesota: Res judicata bars patent claims that could have been asserted in earlier trademark case involving the ‘Same technology and the same accused products’: Superior Industries, LLC v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 3:29 pm
All adult indictable offenses will be heard in the Monmouth County Superior Court - Criminal Part. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 3:29 pm
All adult indictable offenses will be heard in the Monmouth County Superior Court - Criminal Part. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 9:20 am by Richard Zorza
Thank you to all who posted for a spectacularly worthwhile and open conversation about Turner v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 8:25 am
” The purchaser contended that the Fiji green drop was deceptive because it implied that an independent third party organization had endorsed Fiji water as environmentally superior when, in fact, the green drop was purely a marketing creation.The guides included a “globe icon” as an example of a symbol likely to mislead; but the court observed that a symbol of the earth would be more suggestive of a seal of an environmental organization than a… [read post]