Search for: "State v. Light"
Results 3881 - 3900
of 29,348
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
Charge 1 stated a range of only three days. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 8:27 am
Assn. of United States, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 8:22 am
” Ashcroft v. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 4:55 am
The engagement letter issued by BDO and signed by Mr Tinkler required Mr Tinkler to sign a Form 64-8, stating as follows: “the Inland Revenue will treat this as authority to correspond with us [ie BDO], in which case they will not correspond with you except to the extent formally required to do so. [read post]
25 Aug 2021, 3:02 am
Hamilton Textiles v Estate of Mate, 269 AD2d 214 [2000]; Estate of Burke v Repetti & Co., 255 AD2d 483 [1998]). [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 9:01 pm
In two earlier columns (the second of which is here) we discussed McConchie v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 4:10 pm
In Terry v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 9:23 am
This issue was front and center in the unreported (non-precedential) case of Azzolina v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 9:23 am
This issue was front and center in the unreported (non-precedential) case of Azzolina v. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 3:03 am
Back to the Fourth Circuit: On remand from the Supreme Court, the Fourth Circuit kicked the case back down to the U.S District Court for Eastern District of Virginia "for further consideration in light of the United States Supreme Court's decision in [Peter v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 8:52 am
Save Our Access – San Gabriel Mountains v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 8:04 am
The district court properly evaluated the relevant likelihood of confusion factors in light of the evidence presented at trial, including overwhelming evidence of the commercial strength of VAGISIL brand products and Combe’s Eveready consumer survey and a brand recognition, or “fame,” survey (Combe Inc. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 8:04 am
The district court properly evaluated the relevant likelihood of confusion factors in light of the evidence presented at trial, including overwhelming evidence of the commercial strength of VAGISIL brand products and Combe’s Eveready consumer survey and a brand recognition, or “fame,” survey (Combe Inc. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 7:26 am
In Nieto v. [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 5:24 am
The opinion is titled, Enrique Talamantes v. [read post]
22 Aug 2021, 11:07 pm
A recent Divisional Court decision in Morningstar v. [read post]
20 Aug 2021, 4:10 am
In particular, this requires evaluating whether the safeguard is able to satisfy the UK GDPR’s fundamental data protection principles in light of the nature of the transfer; Assess whether the safeguard is enforceable in the country of destination (e., the country where the data importer is located). [read post]
19 Aug 2021, 8:56 pm
” Pottawattamie Cnty. v. [read post]
19 Aug 2021, 5:03 pm
The case, Roberts v. [read post]
19 Aug 2021, 4:34 pm
ItalyForza Nuova v. [read post]
