Search for: "People v Keys" Results 381 - 400 of 8,029
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Aug 2022, 5:36 am by jonathanturley
It used to be that the key criterion for college roommates was whether you are a “partier v. non-partier. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 6:10 pm by IP Dragon
Feess, because the companies had allegedly committed the criminal acts knowing that CYBERsitter was based in California and that its business there could be damaged.Chinese electronics vendor Haier argued, according to Mr Kan, that the case's key defendant, the Chinese government, was immune from a U.S. court's jurisdiction. [read post]
17 Oct 2008, 10:32 pm
In a lengthy opinion, the Court of Appeals in People v Kozlowski, 2008 NY Slip Op 07759 [10/16/08], upheld the larceny (and related) convictions of the former CEO Kozlowski and CFO Swartz of Tyco and the fines of $35 and $70 million imposed on Swartz and Kozlowski, respectively. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 7:28 am by Stephen D. Rosenberg
Some are good, some are bad, some are just plan poorly reasoned and worthy of criticism no matter which side of the “v” you favor. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 12:33 am
Five key points people should know about this case are made by Immigration Impact. [read post]
15 Aug 2020, 10:46 am by Alexis
– Alexis The post Useful Info During COVID (v. 5) appeared first on Law Office of Alexis B. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:58 am by Eric Goldman
Yes, the trademark owner paid substantial money fighting 41 clicks, only to walk out of court with its key trademark asset besmirched. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 6:31 am by JB
The answer that people gave was that as long as limits on association were symmetrical between the races, they were constitutional.We can see this logic at work in Pace v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 2:48 pm by Jay Stanley
As long as drones make enough noise to remind people they are there, they won’t be able fade into the background so easily so that people will forget they are there, which is probably a key prerequisite for imposing surveillance. [read post]