Search for: "Battle v. State"
Results 4501 - 4520
of 7,369
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jan 2012, 7:49 pm
* State v. [read post]
22 Nov 2021, 5:00 am
State law distinguishes the two. [read post]
7 Sep 2007, 5:10 am
We look for a tenacious defensive battle and give the edge to the SEC Tigers, 17-16.Update: OK, here is a good question - where is the University of South Florida located? [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 10:30 am
See Gill v. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 10:30 am
See Gill v. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 10:30 am
See Gill v. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 7:41 am
Among other things, this case has some interesting things to say about IIC and proper controls in survey cases.Alzheimer’s Disease & Related Disorders Association, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2023, 1:27 pm
ChatGPT allegedly stated that the lawsuit was one for fraud and embezzlement on the part of Mr. [read post]
11 Jul 2014, 5:00 am
See Pinsonneault v. [read post]
23 Apr 2025, 7:06 pm
United States, 446 U.S. 156, 176–77 (1980); Gaston Cty. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 12:02 pm
Gonzales (8-1 decision rejecting broad application of the drug-aggravated-felony category to any state drug felony); Carachuri-Rosendo v. [read post]
5 May 2020, 12:59 pm
v. [read post]
18 Jan 2021, 8:15 am
Armed groups mimicked battles for power in dictatorships, stormed and vandalized the Capitol, attacked Capitol police, and attempted to stop the count. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 8:05 pm
See generally Knox v. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 3:29 pm
As the Supreme Court noted in Campbell v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 4:29 am
(For a taste of the U.S. dispute, see Havana Club Holding, S.A. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2020, 11:57 pm
Daimler and Nokia v. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 7:39 am
| Friday FantasiesNever Too Late 160 [week ending Sunday 13 August] Scottish court “vaporized” trade mark invalidity appeal | Battle of the free trade mark databases – Global Brand Database versus TMview | An Improved Improver? [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 1:19 pm
Bank v. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 4:41 am
The Trunki caseThe key cases relevant to these questions were Proctor & Gamble v Reckitt Benckiser [2007] EWCA Civ 936, in which it was held that a registered design based on a line drawing was for the shape alone, and Samsung v Apple [2012] EWCA Civ 1339, in which Apple had contended that lack of ornamentation was a feature of the simple line drawing of a tablet which they had registered as the design. [read post]
