Search for: "Lambert v State"
Results 381 - 400
of 598
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2011, 7:04 am
Lambert, 11-38 (relisted five times). [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 1:02 pm
(for the Court) stated at ¶ 17: Having regard to the terminology adopted by Madam Justice McLachlin in Young v. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 2:00 am
R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 18 Jan 2018. [read post]
19 Feb 2018, 1:00 am
R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 18 Jan 2018. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 6:19 pm
Indeed, the Court’s most recent preemption decision (Warner-Lambert Co. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 5:03 am
”); Lambert v. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 1:03 pm
Lambert, 11-38. [read post]
26 Dec 2015, 6:13 am
In so holding, the court relied upon the California Supreme Court decision in Lambert v. [read post]
3 Mar 2008, 7:05 am
In a second case, the Court divided evenly, 4-4, in Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
4 Jan 2007, 8:26 pm
Lambert v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 1:57 am
The case is Dr Reddy's Laboratories (UK) Ltd and another company v Warner-Lambert Company LLC [2012] EWHC 1719 (Ch), a Patents Court, England and Wales, decision of Mr Justice Roth of 28 June in relation to a dispute which arose over atorvastatin, a popular pharma product distributed in the UK by Pfizer (Warner Lambert being part of the Pfizer group of companies: the defendant was referred to as 'Pfizer' throughout the proceedings). [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 5:00 am
Warner-Lambert Co., 799 F. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 8:48 am
Lambert, 11-38, a state-on-top habeas case alleging that the Third Circuit failed to give appropriate deference to state-court decisions rejecting a prisoner’s Brady claim involving material found in a police file. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 1:53 am
A case in point is Warner-Lambert v Generics (UK).However, applications for second-use patents are increasing, so there must be various other incentives and efficiencies at play. [read post]
13 Nov 2012, 11:54 am
Many courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have recognized a private cause of action for violation of NASD and NYSE Rules, including a private cause of action for andldquo;the failure to supervise.andrdquo;andnbsp; See, e.g., Cook v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 1:39 am
* Caught in the Act: the shameful state of UK copyright legislationA respected senior member of the copyright community writes to the IPKat complaining about the inaccurate text of the CDPA posted on the IPO website. [read post]
6 May 2017, 10:11 am
In Warner-Lambert Co v. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 1:25 pm
See Lambert v. [read post]
5 Aug 2019, 7:46 am
Section 118, as quoted in Lambert v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 3:54 am
ABA Locks and Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
