Search for: "Producers Produce Co. v. Industrial Commission" Results 361 - 380 of 455
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Oct 2008, 12:18 am
Swisa: implications for India (Spicy IP) Centre for Science and Environment accused of copyright infringement by Mint's editor (Spicy IP) Delhi High Court dicta on fair dealing increases woes of news channels: ESPN Stars Sports v. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 3:04 pm by Emily Chan
Federal Elections Commissions (opinion) Citizens United v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 12:47 pm by Daniel J. Gilman
One could take a deep dive into the 1954 merger, but the problem is ubiquitous across diverse industries or lines of commerce and was characteristic of, e.g., industrialization. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 4:15 pm by INFORRM
As IPKat explains, Kelis is not the rights holder of the song: her problem is with her producers, not Beyoncé. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 9:22 am by James Hamilton
Because the derivatives market was considered too big and too interconnected to fail, taxpayers had to foot the bill for bad bets that linked thousands of traders and created a web in which one default threatened to produce a chain of corporate and economic failures worldwide. [read post]
18 Oct 2006, 5:26 pm
" Michigan Wisconsin Pipe Line Co., 194 NLRB 569, 470 (1971), et al. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 2:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
The whistleblower provisions include the creation of a new whistleblower bounty pursuant to which individuals who bring violations of securities and commodities laws to the attention of the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodities Futures Trading Commission will receive between 10 percent and 30 percent of any recovery in excess of $1 million. ? [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 4:06 pm by admin
— Ethanol Producer Magazine, October 27, 2009 A Winnebago company was sentenced today in federal court for discharging into Rice Lake wastewater containing a pollutant. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 3:22 pm by Stephen Page
Reference was then made to the judgment of Heydon J in Kirk v Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales [2010] HCA 1; (2010) 239 CLR 531, in reliance upon which it was submitted that the “discretionary functions carried out by a family consultant” gave rise to obligations of the kind to which Heydon J referred in the context of the Industrial Relations Court. [read post]