Search for: "Bounds v. State"
Results 4801 - 4820
of 9,960
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Apr 2015, 3:03 pm
In a recent appeal stemming from a car accident, Horath v. [read post]
8 Apr 2015, 12:10 pm
shutterstock/rawpixel “hands holding bubbles with social media words” This case addresses whether social media accounts used in connection with a business become property of the bankruptcy estate. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 2:42 pm
Two interesting amicus briefs in Obergefell v. [read post]
4 Apr 2015, 4:00 pm
" United States v Yancey, 621 F3d 681, 684-85 (7th Cir. 2010). [read post]
4 Apr 2015, 3:42 pm
" United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 8:27 am
They cite Lord Nicholls in Douglas v Hello 3 (OBG v Allan) as clearly stating that the concept of breach of confidence and misuse of private information “now covers two distinct causes of action”. [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 7:11 am
Further, where the letter of intent is unambiguous and constitutes an enforceable contract, it is unnecessary to have a plenary hearing on the merits of a motion to enforce a settlement agreementFacts: The appeal arose out of the execution of a letter of intent which was the result of the settlement of litigation over the contested ownership of parking spaces.Analysis: Distinguishing Cochran v Norkunas, which held that the parties did not intend to be bound by… [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:45 am
For once a case or controversy properly comes before a court, judges are bound by federal law. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 7:03 am
See State v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 1:53 am
He also held, bound by the decision in Kitechnology BV v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 9:30 pm
The legitimacy of presidential constitutionalism is frequently debated, most recently in the context of President Obama’s refusal to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 4:21 am
Are “we” bound “by virtue of being in society” by the laws regardless of what they say? [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 12:52 am
Bearing this in mind, Case T 378/13 Apple and Pear Australia Ltd and Star Fruits Diffusion v OHIM, Carolus C. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 4:27 am
IOAN CIUNGU, BENEFICIARY, Appellant, v. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 6:53 am
Widmann, it stated in a footnote that sovereign immunity precluded a personal-capacity damages claim filed against state officials. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 12:13 pm
District Court for the Northern District of California denied in Puccio v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 10:00 am
Nevertheless, when four Texas parents discovered that the state retained the infant blood spots for future research, they sued (Beleno v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 7:53 am
” (Navarro v. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 10:30 pm
As a recent non-precedential (meaning that other courts are not bound by the decision) Pennsylvania decision, C.A.W. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2015, 2:24 pm
In Kindred v. [read post]
