Search for: "Hoffman v. Young" Results 21 - 40 of 64
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Oct 2015, 6:30 am by Dan Ernst
Paul Pruitt’s collection of young lawyers’ research reveals a new field. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 4:13 am by Amy Howe
At the Ogletree Deakins blog, Hera Arsen discusses Young v. [read post]
7 May 2016, 7:32 am by Alex R. McQuade
 Laura Donohue commented on the public v. private collection debate and observed that in the end, it all comes down to power. [read post]
17 Mar 2012, 12:51 pm by Jim Gerl
See Jan Hoffman, As Bullies Go Digital, Parents Play Catch-up, N.Y. [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 10:32 am by Larry
” The opinion wraps up (pun noted but not intended) with just one word of sage advice to a young Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) from Mr. [read post]
10 Dec 2013, 11:53 am
Lack of assessment of features 'commonplace' in current papercut works DJ Clarke outlined the correct approach to be used in comparing artistic works, as that of Lord Hoffman in Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textile) Ltd. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 12:50 am by Matthew Flinn
If that were true, the prosecution of E could send the wrong message to other young people being similarly exploited. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 4:37 pm by Roger Alford
Fortunately, some incredibly productive young guns like Chris Whytock, Trey Childress, and Anthony Colangelo are filling the gap. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 1:00 pm
FDA issues draft guidance on submission of patent information for certain old antibiotics (FDA Law Blog) US: FDA publishes new guidance on contents of a complete submission for the evaluation of proprietary names (FDA Law Blog) USPTO appeals Wyeth v Dudas decision on patent term adjustment calculation; more patentees (including Molecular Insight and Biogen) follow Wyeth’s lead in seeking additional patent term adjustment (IP Updates) (Patent Docs) (Law360) (Patent Docs) (Law360)… [read post]
—PART V— Not all Native Advertising May Be Commercial Speech under the First Amendment If there is one thing clear from the case law, it is that the commercial speech analysis under the First Amendment is a fact intensive one that does not clearly lend itself to bright lines, especially when dealing with mixed commercial and noncommercial speech. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 2:44 pm
  That is why the district court was correct and the Sixth Circuit is wrong in Payne v. [read post]