Search for: "Sales, C. v. Sales, S."
Results 4281 - 4300
of 6,064
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jul 2011, 3:59 am
The bad news for the defendant in the 10th District’s decision in State v. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 1:05 am
V. [read post]
17 Jul 2011, 10:30 am
[Brought to London by Flechtheim when he started to work for the Mayor Gallery, c. 1934.] 1934 – 1935For sale during Paul Klee exhibition at Kunsthalle Basel, 1935(Paul Klee, Bern. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 3:32 am
Quizás ni lo uno ni lo otro. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 3:07 pm
Attachment and garnishment -- Cook v. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 9:23 am
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW / SAMUEL M. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 4:30 am
The Case is C-46/10 Viking Gas A/S v Kosan Gas A/S, formerly BP Gas A/S, a reference for a preliminary ruling under from the Danish Højesteret [the IPKat interjects to add that, since the Danes are so good at speaking other languages, it is easy to forget that they speak Danish too: Højesteret is the Danish for 'Supreme Court' and is not, as Merpel mischievously tells people, a tasty dessert]. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:49 am
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW / SAMUEL M. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 6:42 am
This past Term’s Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 9:01 pm
(One example: "USA v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 11:12 am
In RGH Liquidating Trust v. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 7:12 am
Here in Part III, in alphabetical order, are some early responses to this morning's Court of Justice ruling in Case C? [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:59 am
KATNOTE: IF YOU NEED TO CHECK THE FACTS THAT TRIGGERED THIS PIECE OF LITIGATION, THE QUESTIONS REFERRED FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S OPINION, READ L’Oréal v eBay I: background to this morning's ruling BEFORE YOU READ THIS POST The ruling in Case C? [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 2:58 am
KATNOTE: IF YOU ARE QUITE FAMILIAR WITH THE FACTS THAT TRIGGERED THIS PIECE OF LITIGATION, THE QUESTIONS REFERRED FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S OPINION, YOU CAN SKIP THIS POST AND MOVE STRAIGHT ON TO L’Oréal v eBay II: what the Court says It was only two short years ago that Mr Justice Arnold told us that he was referring a number of questions to the Court of Justice of… [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 5:00 pm
Tacoma Fixture Co. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 1:33 pm
Co. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 11:52 am
(See, e.g., AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 9:31 am
(Jock v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 2:21 am
However, Case C-212/08 Zeturf Ltd v Premier Ministre, seems to cast an interesting light on internet trading. [read post]
10 Jul 2011, 4:38 pm
For example, the Supreme Court had held that an LPA is maintainable against a judgment given by a single judge under: (a) s. 76(1) of the Trademarks Act, 1940 (National Sewing Thread Co v James Chadwick—a three-judge Bench); (b) s. 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Vinita Khanolkar v Pai—a two-judge Bench); (c) s. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Sharda Devi v State of Bihar—a three-judge Bench); (d) s.… [read post]
