Search for: "Light v. State Bar"
Results 4841 - 4860
of 5,598
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Oct 2014, 9:01 am
Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on a high-stakes legal battle between a brand-name drug company and a group of companies making generic drugs – Teva Pharmaceuticals USA v. [read post]
28 Jul 2010, 9:46 pm
In Shandler v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:35 am
A recently published decision, Mendoza v. [read post]
6 May 2019, 9:41 am
Both the Supreme Court in the seminal Reno v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 2:32 am
For example, when descendants of victims undertake litigation to reclaim wrongfully dispossessed property, their claims may be barred if they fail to prove an artwork was improperly transferred or, alternatively, may be barred on technical defenses before the court addresses the substantive matter.[15] Additionally, conflicts between descendants and current possessors of art works may be resolved and the piece restituted to descendants before a museum acquires it for its… [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 9:31 am
Hogan v. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 12:09 pm
Supreme Court vacated that decision and remanded it for reconsideration in light of its Opinion in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 9:55 pm
Co. v. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 7:14 am
Kurtz v. [read post]
South Africa: Defamation and vindication, the Supreme Court of Appeal’s flawed approach – Dario Milo
26 Mar 2022, 5:31 pm
This has left our law in a most unsatisfactory state. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 6:28 pm
In Hill v. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 2:00 pm
v. [read post]
6 Jun 2008, 6:35 am
A simple hypothetical drawn from the facts in San Antonio v. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 3:00 am
Sullivan v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 2:57 pm
KRR and Dell v. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 3:13 am
For instance, in Texas v. [read post]
1 May 2017, 11:36 am
If there were something substantively wrong with Canada’s Patent Act that makes it non-compliant with international law, it could have been challenged in a state to state procedure in the WTO. [read post]
1 May 2017, 11:36 am
If there were something substantively wrong with Canada’s Patent Act that makes it non-compliant with international law, it could have been challenged in a state to state procedure in the WTO. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 6:06 am
” (See Prosecutor v Karadzić (Decision) 16 May 1995 (ICTY Trial Chamber) paras 23-24.) [read post]
