Search for: "People v Holder"
Results 421 - 440
of 2,487
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Apr 2013, 10:10 am
That seems about as fair to me as allowing copyright holders to dictate which one-of-a-kind objects people are entitled to create, even when those objects have no plausible relationship to copyright holders’ economic interests. [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 8:19 am
Return Mail, Inc. v. [read post]
20 May 2015, 4:05 pm
The EACJ followed the reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights (Goodwin v. [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 8:49 am
Holder. [read post]
12 Mar 2013, 9:01 pm
During the oral argument in Shelby County v. [read post]
17 Mar 2016, 11:21 am
And you can get at all, or virtually all, of the product if the plastic "holder" stops over -- rather than under -- the lip. [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 11:54 am
Dor-sho-gha, Telegraph, do you want people to read this website or not? [read post]
18 Sep 2011, 8:03 pm
EEOC v. [read post]
14 Dec 2008, 12:20 pm
See also Alib, Inc. v Atlantice Casualty Insurance Company, 52 AD3d 419 (1st Dept 2008); Glynn v United House of Prayer for All People, 292 AD7d 319, 322 (1st Dept 2002) ; Herbert St. [read post]
18 Apr 2023, 7:07 pm
They could still identify Sisvel v. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 12:25 pm
For a copy of the Appellate Division's decision in Siegel v. [read post]
29 Oct 2021, 6:00 am
Shelley v. [read post]
6 Oct 2017, 3:30 am
Sessions also relied upon Judge Diane Sykes’s dissenting opinion in Hively v. [read post]
8 Apr 2009, 6:00 pm
In Gallus v. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 2:17 pm
The decision in Warren v. [read post]
25 May 2009, 12:29 pm
In Lotito v. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm
Holder that essentially gutted the so-called “preclearance” requirements under the Voting Rights Act (VRA). [read post]
28 Dec 2018, 4:04 pm
Question 2 of this document provided: “The undersigned account holder hereby declares that he/she is the beneficial owner of the assets and income to which this declaration relates in accordance with [United States] tax law. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 3:13 am
The question for the ET was whether it is reasonably necessary in order to achieve the legitimate aims of the scheme to deny those benefits to people in the applicant’s position. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 3:41 pm
Today's ruling in Latif v. [read post]
