Search for: "Stephens Industries, Inc. v. American Express Co." Results 21 - 37 of 37
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 May 2007, 12:52 am
Splenda case, or, as it's officially known, Merisant Co. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 2:09 pm by Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson
American Honda Motor Company, Inc. (2000) 529 U.S. 861, 868, 120 S.Ct. 1913, 146 L.Ed.2d 914) (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) “[A] reading of the express pre-emption provision that excludes common-law tort actions gives actual meaning to the saving clause's literal language, while leaving adequate room for state tort law to operate-for example, where federal law creates only a floor, i.e., a minimum safety standard. [read post]
16 May 2008, 8:03 am
– Discussion of  T Berg’s paper ‘IP and the preferential option for the poor’: (ISinIP), Patent valuation: differing analytical methods: (Hal Wegner) Global - Copyright Copyright as an engine of free expression? [read post]
30 Dec 2018, 3:03 am by Ben
Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit in Folkens v Wyland. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 8:19 am by John Delaney and Meredith W. Louis
Socially Aware: You also anticipated in Copyright’s Highway the key issue raised in 2014’s most closely followed U.S. copyright case, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 8:10 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  512 has empowered platforms for artists and all Americans to express themselves. [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 5:08 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  As Democratic Senator Chris Coons, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was recently quoted as saying, President Trump’s influence on the federal judiciary as a result of his nominations “will be the single most important legacy of the Trump administration,” adding with respect to the kinds of candidates that the Trump administration has been nominating, that “given their youth and conservatism, they will have a significant impact on the shape and… [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:31 pm by Steven Boutwell
Another group of courts found that the exclusion was ambiguous or required to be interpreted based on history of the exclusion and looked at the presentations of the insurance industry to the various insurance commissioners in the various states “Doer v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 4:14 am by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court’s 1974 decision in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. [read post]