Search for: "State v. Word" Results 4241 - 4260 of 40,645
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Jul 2023, 6:21 am by Charles Sartain
It depends on context, says the Supreme Court of Texas in Finley Resources Inc. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 12:35 pm by Eliot Kim
Earlier this month, the Second Circuit issued a decision in Linde v. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 1:52 am by 1 Crown Office Row
R (T) v (1) Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, (2) Secretary of State for the Home Department (Secretary of State for Justice an interested party) [2012] EWHC 147 (Admin) – read judgment. [read post]
12 May 2010, 12:34 pm by jmehalik
In other words, if a corporation has a particular political affiliation, they would be less likely or not eligible for state funds. [read post]
30 Apr 2007, 10:21 pm
The Supreme Court's new opinion KSR Int'l Co. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 9:35 am by WIMS
In other words, ERF contends that "point sources" are not just "ditches, culverts, and similar channels," but any "tangible, identifiable thing." [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 11:58 am by Jonathan H. Adler
  In other words, it’s a much more modest argument than one would have expected from a Republican administration. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 5:56 pm by Stephen Jenei
The Court stated, “to transform an unpatentable law of nature into a patent-eligible application of such a law, a patent must do more than simply state the law of nature while adding the words ‘apply it. [read post]
10 May 2016, 7:56 am by Sally-Ann Underhill
We often see contracts containing wording along the lines of: “This Agreement may not be amended, except by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. [read post]