Search for: "BAKER v BAKER"
Results 4241 - 4260
of 4,856
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2008, 7:18 pm
Baker Sch Dist 5J 481 F.3d 770, 47 IDELR 182 (9th Cir. 4/3/2007). [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 6:08 pm
Baker. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 4:14 pm
., v. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 8:57 am
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Stock, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 1862 (08 August 2008) Freeman, R v [2008] EWCA Crim 1863 (08 August 2008) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Sony Computer Entertainment UK Ltd v Cinram Logistics UK Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 955 (08 August 2008) High Court (Queen’s Bench) Collett v Smith & Anor [2008] EWHC 1962 (QB) (11 August 2008) High Court (Chancery Division) Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services Ltd & Ors… [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 5:51 pm
Chad Reynolds, a 27-page opinion, Chief Judge Baker writes:Appellant-defendant Dutchmen Manufacturing, Inc. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 5:56 pm
MATHIAS, J. concurs BAKER, C. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 7:22 am
Baker, unlike numerous law professors in the intellectual property area, understood that not all inventions are innovative, and certainly that invention and innovation are not synonyms. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 8:58 pm
., and Mary Palmero v. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 5:16 pm
Brady v. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 4:41 pm
Adidas AG et al v. 2690942 Canada Inc. c.o.b. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 8:01 am
(In re Radbil), 364 B.R. 355, 358 (Bankr.E.D.Wis.2007); Baker v. [read post]
5 Aug 2008, 9:55 pm
The § 102(b) exclusions, as Samuelson makes clear, have their origins in Baker v. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 7:06 pm
Baker, No. 06-40757 Conviction for possessing, receiving, and distributing child pornography is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the sentence vacated and remanded, where: 1) a pretrial motion to suppress evidence was properly denied; but 2) two government exhibits that were the basis for the distribution conviction were improperly admitted as lacking respectively a proper foundation and proper authentication. [read post]
1 Aug 2008, 11:14 am
A new decision, United States v. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 4:54 pm
BAKER, C.J., concurs. [read post]
29 Jul 2008, 9:52 pm
Van Duyn ex rel Van Duyn v. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 1:44 pm
Rick Hasen expresses understandable concern over a footnote in the recent Supreme Court opinion in Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 3:27 pm
Baker, 554 U. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 4:00 am
Baker (07-219). [read post]
26 Jul 2008, 3:55 pm
Baker, No. 07-219. [read post]
