Search for: "State v. B. A. F." Results 421 - 440 of 12,249
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
New Issue: Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht
13 May 2022, 11:11 pm by Jacob Katz Cogan
The latest issue of the Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (Vol. 82, no. 1, 2022) is out. [read post]
International Law Reporter - https://ilreports.blogspot.com/
First Circuit Reaffirms FCA’s “First-to-File” Bar as a Broad Jurisdictional Limit
22 Jan 2015, 10:08 am by Matthew Turetzky
§ 3730(b)(5), in United States ex rel. [read post]
Government Contracts Blog - http://www.governmentcontractslawblog.com/
7th Cir.: Collective Action FLSA Claims May Proceed In A “Hybrid Action” With State Law Rule 23 Claims
22 Jan 2011, 5:34 am by Andrew Frisch
Co., 448 F.3d 416, 420-25 (D.C.Cir.2006) (concluding, in the context of an appeal under Rule 23(f), that the FLSA does not necessarily preclude an exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over related state-law claims); De Asencio v. [read post]
Overtime Law Blog | FLSA Decisions - http://overtimelaw.wordpress.com
Later Discovery of an Outstanding Arrest Warrant Does Not Remove Taint from an Illegal Stop
15 Jun 2011, 7:46 am by Wendi Overmyer, N.D. Ohio
In United States v. [read post]
Sixth Circuit Blog - http://circuit6.blogspot.com/
U.S. Supreme Court, Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., Docket No. 22-1165
13 May 2024, 3:42 pm
Morgan Stanley, 776 F. 3d 94, 101 (CA2 2015) (“Item 303’s affirmative duty to disclose in Form 10–Qs can serve as the basis for a securities fraud claim under Section 10(b)”), with In re Nvidia, 768 F. 3d 1046, 1056 (CA9 2014) (“Item 303 does not create a duty to disclose for purposes of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5”); see also Oran v. [read post]
Frederic Borel - http://fredericborel.blogspot.ch/
239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm by ligitsec
B. [read post]
Nick Woolridge, Esq. Blog - http://www.nylitigationfirm.com/blog
United States Supreme Court Holds that Class Action Securities Fraud Plaintiffs Need Not Prove the Materiality of the Alleged False Statements or Omissions to Support Certification of a Class, Resolving Circuit Split
7 Mar 2013, 9:45 am
Litig., 639 F.3d 623 (3d Cir. 2011); Schleicher v. [read post]
Corporate Securities Law Blog - http://www.corporatesecuritieslawblog.com/
Probation office contact with probationer's employer to verify employment status does not constitute occupational restriction on probationer
26 Feb 2007, 10:02 am
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTIONUnited States v. [read post]
Direct Appeal - http://directappeal2.blogspot.com/
S.D.N.Y. Notes Split Re Whether Defendant Classes are Permissible in Class Actions under Rule 23(b)(2)
27 Aug 2007, 6:53 am
Co., 2 F.3d 1023 (10th Cir.1993) (affirming certification of a(b)(2) defendant class); Baker v. [read post]
Split Circuits - http://splitcircuits.blogspot.com/
Ex rel. DR. PETER ROST v. PFIZER, INC., and PHARMACIA CORPORATION, CIVIL ACTION NO. 03-11084-PBS
2 Oct 2008, 4:27 am
Rost v. [read post]
THE PHARMA LAW BLOG - http://peterrost.blogspot.com/
The Impact of TC Heartland: Motion to Challenge Venue Waived Where Defendant Failed to Bring Motion with Other Rule 12(b) Motion
13 Jul 2017, 5:22 pm by Stan Gibson
Co. v. [read post]
Patent Lawyer Blog - http://patentlaw.jmbm.com/
Murder committed in national forest in Oklahoma falls within federal jurisdiction
28 Feb 2008, 5:07 am
JURISDICTIONUnited States v. [read post]
Direct Appeal - http://directappeal2.blogspot.com/
Schuster v. SLM Corporation (U.S.D.C.)
4 Dec 2017, 6:58 am
Spaulding v. [read post]
Maryland Business Law Developments - http://marylandbusinesslawdevelopments.blogspot.com/
Venue in Multi-District States
23 Oct 2017, 4:47 am by Dennis Crouch
La. 1984) (Under 1400(b), “venue is proper under section 1400(b), in any judicial district in its state of incorporation”; expressly refusing to follow Action Comm.); Brynes v. [read post]
Patently-O - http://patentlyo.com/patent
Case o' The Week: Ninth Tuts Hut Scuttlebutt - Wells and FRE 404(b) Evidence
7 Jan 2018, 4:24 pm by Steve Kalar
  “[United States v.] [read post]
Ninth Circuit Blog - http://circuit9.blogspot.com/
When a sex offense is not a “sex offense”: plain error to apply career sex offender enhancement; categorical approach controls analysis of state law prior convictions
7 Sep 2016, 10:51 am by The Blog Team
United States v. [read post]
The Federal Criminal Appeals Blog - http://www.federalcriminalappealsblog.com/
Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech.: SCOTUS Finds Induced Infringement First Requires Direct Infringement
2 Jun 2014, 9:40 am
[…]Limelight Networks, Inc. at *4-5 (some internal citations omitted).271(f)(1) and §271(b)Section 271(f)(1) reinforces our reading of §271(b). [read post]
Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society - http://jptos.org
CAFC tackles estoppel, royalty rate in XY v. Trans Ova
24 May 2018, 12:39 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Arizona v. [read post]
IPBiz - http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/
Pro se Appellant Burnett loses in a 12(b)(6)/101 case
17 Jul 2018, 6:50 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Monroe v. [read post]
IPBiz - http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/
Subscriber information provided to internet service provider is not protected by Fourth Amendment privacy expectation
14 Apr 2008, 4:10 am
SEARCH & SEIZUREUnited States v. [read post]
Direct Appeal - http://directappeal2.blogspot.com/