Search for: "State v. Sales"
Results 3721 - 3740
of 20,855
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Feb 2010, 5:41 am
" In Canada, this means the liability set forth in s. 27(2) of the Act that deals with such matters as sale, distribution, and importation. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 4:30 am
The AG’s hypothetical complaint would have been based on the state DTPA, so a four part test from Singh v. [read post]
29 Aug 2024, 12:55 pm
They clearly won the narrative battle and made a difficult doctrinal sale. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 7:30 am
United States and Dorsey v. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 2:14 pm
State v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 2:26 pm
This week the Ontario Court of Appeal released a much awaited decision in the case of Westerhof v. [read post]
9 Nov 2016, 6:48 am
State v. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 7:55 am
” Going on to state that “this transaction would have happened with or without [Plaintiff]”. [read post]
SYNTHETIC DRUG BUSTS: FEDERAL ARRESTS FOR FAKE POT AND DESIGNER DRUGS THAT ARE LEGAL UNDER STATE LAW
31 May 2014, 1:34 pm
Under the CSA, there are five classification schedules (Schedules I – V) for their regulation, with Schedule I being the most restrictive and Schedule V the least. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 2:24 am
As soon as other generics enter the market and start competing the price falls rapidly to a level dictated by the generic companies costs of sales and profit margin. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 10:37 am
Court, WD Texas 2013 United States District Court, W.D. [read post]
25 Jan 2009, 11:48 am
In that case, the parties entered into a sublease for a 145 square foot space in a shopping mall used by the Subtenant for the rental and sale of DVD's. [read post]
20 Feb 2007, 9:30 pm
Sexual devices have become commonplace, but Alabama and some other states criminalize their sale and production. [read post]
25 Nov 2013, 5:22 am
In Terry Phillips Sales, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 5:41 am
” United States v. [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 5:15 pm
You can view the entire Samsung v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 10:50 am
Co. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 6:55 am
Makowski v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 5:05 pm
The exclusion in 2602(B)(v) is for “any article the sale of which is subject to the tax imposed by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [26 U.S.C. 4181] (determined without regard to any exemptions from such tax provided by section 4182 or 4221 or any other provision of such Code). [read post]
4 Aug 2015, 11:45 am
Ericsson:Contrary to Marvell’s contention, Harris Corp. v. [read post]
