Search for: "State v. Downes" Results 4761 - 4780 of 36,289
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Nov 2020, 3:30 am by Brian Bix
Matsumura, Breaking Down Status, __ Wash. [read post]
20 Feb 2020, 4:19 pm by INFORRM
In a judgment handed down on 18 December 2019 (Tsamis v Victoria (No 7) [2019] VSC 826) His Honour found that even though Tsamis’ reputation was to some extent lowered by the true identification of drug activities at her venue, it was ameliorated by the finding that she was uncaring for the welfare of patrons. [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 3:05 am by INFORRM
On 15 December 2023, as stated above, Fancourt J handed down judgement in favour of the claimants in the case of The Duke of Sussex and Ors v MGN Limited [2023] EWHC 3217 (Ch). [read post]
15 Feb 2023, 10:25 am by Eric Goldman
It is well-established that a private entity has an ability to make “choices about whether, to what extent, and in what manner it will disseminate speech…” NetChoice, LLC v. [read post]
22 Jun 2021, 1:27 am by Mark Summerfield
  Nonetheless, this case will generate some interest, if only because the result in Australia is opposed to the outcome of equivalent litigation between Sequenom and Ariosa involving a corresponding patent in the United States. [read post]
16 Feb 2022, 8:40 am by Ellen T. Berge and Shahin O. Rothermel
Here we break down the compliance challenges posed by varying state laws addressing automatic renewal programs (also known as continuous service, continuity, subscription, or negative option programs), how newer card brand rules further stir the pot, and the low-hanging fruit that law enforcement agencies and private plaintiffs are going after for monetary redress and injunctive relief. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 8:06 am by CMS
The Heathrow Judgment was circulated to the parties’ representatives on 9 December 2020 and it was to be handed down on the morning of 16 December 2020. [read post]
30 Jan 2013, 11:37 am by Stone Law, P.C.
What this case may come down to is what the phrase “lawfully made under this title” in §109(a) actually means. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 12:34 pm
The California Court of Appeal recently came down with a decision in the case of Ritter & Ritter Inc. v. [read post]