Search for: "State v. Sellers"
Results 381 - 400
of 3,971
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2014, 3:25 am
Under the Regulations, sellers must give consumers, at the point the contract is concluded, written notice of their right to cancel. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 6:04 am
State v. [read post]
23 May 2017, 10:04 am
A recent case out of Texas, Naquin v. [read post]
28 Dec 2013, 4:35 pm
Courts in some other states have ruled differently, holding that sellers only have a duty to reveal physical, structural, or legal defects, not poltergeists. [read post]
12 Jan 2018, 3:15 pm
In the 1967 decision in National Bellas Hess v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 11:51 am
Justice Kennedy invited states to mount a challenge to the bright-line physical test articulated in Quill v. [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 9:54 pm
In Jannusch v. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 5:00 am
Accordingly, it looks like the broader issue in this case is whether a contractual relationship alone can create physical presence here for an out-of-state seller. 2. [read post]
10 May 2018, 3:00 pm
The petition of the day is: Lance v. [read post]
13 Jan 2018, 8:00 pm
Consider Hanberry v. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 5:58 am
In FdG Logistics v. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 1:06 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 5:49 am
Last week, Judge Jackson Kiser of the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia issued an opinion and order in Clement v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 2:47 am
In People v. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 4:53 am
Last week, the Court granted cert in South Dakota v. [read post]
20 Jan 2018, 4:53 am
Last week, the Court granted cert in South Dakota v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 1:12 pm
The Supreme Court handed down a disastrous antitrust opinion in Ohio v. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 1:11 pm
In its 2011 decision in Harrington v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 3:47 am
(Curry v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 3:47 am
(Curry v. [read post]
