Search for: "I v. B"
Results 361 - 380
of 24,508
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 May 2015, 2:20 am
B pleaded guilty to a number of offences. [read post]
9 Apr 2016, 4:28 pm
On 29 March 2016 the Grand Chamber added a new judgment to this list in the case of Bédat v. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 1:17 pm
We reject this reading of Rule 4:1(b)(4)(A)(i). [read post]
27 Aug 2021, 1:32 pm
This is a personal jurisdiction case, something that I know a little bit about, having taught the subject in Civil Procedure for a quarter century or so.On the merits, Section I of the opinion correctly cites the "Principles of Personal Jurisdiction," though one might have wanted to cite McGee in there as well given its close similarity to the present case. [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 9:53 pm
How far Rule 23(b)(2) can be stretched is the issue in the gigantic class action against Wal-Mart, Dukes v. [read post]
21 Apr 2007, 3:03 am
In making its determination, the Court analyzed the motion using the five factors set forth in Kaufman v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 9:38 am
(Compare Rule 23(b)(2) with 23(b)(1) and 23(b)(3); Dukes, supra, 131 S.Ct. at p. 2558 [“monetary claims belong in Rule 23(b)(3)”].) [read post]
22 Jun 2011, 1:29 pm
“The class in this case, I agree with the Court, should not have been certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2). [read post]
22 Jul 2019, 1:20 pm
(B) A Wooden Chair. [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 1:43 am
In my article "Divided by a common language: US and UK patent law" which was published in Science, People & Politics (April to June 2011) I noted that one of the differences between US and UK patent law was that 35 USC 102 (b) of the US act permits an application for a US patent even where the invention has been described in a publication or application for a foreign patent that has been made in [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 6:40 am
U.S. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 4:00 am
El juez Neil Gorsuch suscribió la opinión del Tribunal, de una mayoría de cinco (5) jueces – Gorsuch, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor y Kavanuagh, con respecto a las secciones I, II(A), III y IV(B)(1). [read post]
18 Nov 2013, 1:37 pm
Power Tools, Inc. d/b/a Axceler, 7:13CV00035 (W.D. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 4:05 am
In Society of the Divine Word v. [read post]
19 Jun 2009, 12:25 pm
I've only had a chance to read the SCt's opinion in DA's Office v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 9:36 am
R (Heffernan) v Rent Service; [2008] WLR (D) 279 “Rent officers, in identifying the ‘locality’ under Sch 1, Pt I to the Rent Officers (Housing Benefit Functions) Order 1997, as amended, needed to assemble only enough ‘neighbourhoods’ to satisfy the requirements of para 4(6)(c). [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 11:56 am
Re: ORS 166.065(1)(a)(B)OREGON v. [read post]
6 Mar 2025, 3:43 pm
The post State v. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 8:13 am
Case: Beverly Enterprises Inc. v. [read post]
25 May 2012, 8:06 am
Ashcroft v. [read post]
