Search for: "Good v. State"
Results 4701 - 4720
of 44,366
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2022, 9:24 am
CUS Nashville Employee Terminated for Facebook Message Fails to State Public Policy Claim — Barnett v. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 3:59 am
In England and any other common law jurisdiction (outside the United States), the damages would, at most have been in the low tens of thousands of pounds. [read post]
26 May 2023, 1:28 pm
Co. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2023, 5:08 am
As the CJEU held in BMS v. [read post]
11 Oct 2020, 11:43 am
The applications were accompanied by a description stating: “Colouring of vehicles in the colours red, white and orange, as shown”. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 2:15 pm
See, e.g., United States v. [read post]
10 May 2019, 11:37 am
But it didn't do the individual much good, as the high court affirmed the lower courts' judgment in the bank's favor. [read post]
25 Feb 2021, 10:14 am
Sixth Circuit reinstates Ohio State University’s Lanham Act and state law right-of-publicity claims against Redbubble: You can access today’s ruling of the U.S. [read post]
10 Dec 2022, 6:12 am
For the decision, the Chamber stated the following: “…five mitigating circumstances, namely: (i) your admission of guilt; (ii) your cooperation with the Prosecution; (iii) the remorse and the empathy you expressed for the victims; (iv) your initial reluctance to commit the crime and the steps you took to limit the damage caused; and, (v) even if of limited importance, your good behavior in detention despite your family situation. [read post]
10 Dec 2022, 6:12 am
For the decision, the Chamber stated the following: “…five mitigating circumstances, namely: (i) your admission of guilt; (ii) your cooperation with the Prosecution; (iii) the remorse and the empathy you expressed for the victims; (iv) your initial reluctance to commit the crime and the steps you took to limit the damage caused; and, (v) even if of limited importance, your good behavior in detention despite your family situation. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 12:19 pm
The court relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
22 Aug 2019, 1:28 pm
Kansas v. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 1:20 pm
In Hill v. [read post]
9 Oct 2013, 11:14 am
Ames, 188 U.S. 321 (1903) (Commerce power extended to prohibiting commerce in certain goods, in this case shipping Paraguayan lottery tickets across state lines); Swift and Company v. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 7:20 am
Check the Carr v. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 3:05 am
The plaintiff failed to demonstrate prima facie that the defendants "[1] regularly do[ ] or solicit[ ] business, or engage[ ] in any other persistent course of conduct, or derive[ ] substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in the state," or "[2] expect[ ] or should reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derive[ ] substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce" (CPLR 302[a][3][i], [ii];… [read post]
25 May 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V Neither of the Contracting Parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizens under this Treaty, but the executive authority of each shall have the power to deliver them up, if, in its discretion, it be deemed proper to do so. [read post]
7 Jul 2019, 4:22 am
We’re the good guys now! [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 2:37 pm
--Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of IllinoisOpinion Date: 4/11/11Cite: Saban v. [read post]