Search for: "US v. Stone" Results 401 - 420 of 2,489
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jan 2020, 10:45 am
Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984); another based on Cuyler v. [read post]
23 May 2013, 5:58 am by Timothy P. Flynn
  We here at the Law Blogger suggest that 15 or 20 minutes clearly is not sufficient to keep the rest of us safe from a pot patient's stoned driving. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 9:30 pm by Dan Ernst
  Sean Wilentz, in Rolling Stone (via HNN) on Why We Must Impeach. [read post]
26 Jul 2022, 7:34 am by Eric Goldman
BagSpot * AdWords Buys Using Geographic Terms Support Personal Jurisdiction–Rilley v. [read post]
22 May 2023, 7:46 am by Eric Goldman
The court summarizes its conclusion on the multi-factor analysis: The three relevant screenshots produced by Plaintiff show clear labeling of Defendants’ entry, using Defendants’ name and prominently labelled as an “Ad,” and with no use of Plaintiff’s trademark or confusingly similar language or content. [read post]
14 May 2012, 7:22 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 Burrell also points to a related result in Musidor BV v Tansing (1994) 52 FCR 363 (Federal Court of Australia – Full Court) (use of “The Rolling Stones” on the cover of lawful but unauthorized sound recordings was legitimate). [read post]