Search for: "May v. Bennett*"
Results 481 - 500
of 1,290
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 May 2019, 8:18 am
EEOC v. [read post]
17 Mar 2022, 12:31 pm
Fortunately, there may be another option - temporary relief. [read post]
14 Dec 2019, 12:41 am
A dispute between the firm of Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – owned by listed entity IPH Limited (ASX:IPH) – and a firm established by two former Pizzeys principals, has gained public exposure through a decision of Justice Jagot in the Federal Court of Australia: Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys Pty Limited v Bennett [2019] FCA 2084. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 10:42 pm
Apple Inc. v Samsung Electronics Co. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 5:41 am
Papers may be considered for inclusion in a special section of a future issue of the Journal of Media Law. [read post]
30 May 2011, 5:19 pm
on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 Email This BlogThis! [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 5:04 pm
In Bennett v. [read post]
7 Apr 2010, 10:38 am
The following settlement in a Northeastern Pennsylvania trucking accident case was recently reported in the Legal Intelligencer and the Pennsylvania Law Weekly.Case name:HELEN and ANTHONY GROSEK, JR. v. [read post]
21 Feb 2022, 12:24 am
The next Data Protection Foundation Course is in London, and starts on the 9-11 May (3 days); full details available here. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 4:35 pm
Related articles Connick v. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 2:57 am
A cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR § 3212 made after the expiration of the statutory period or court-ordered deadline may be considered by the court, even in the absence of good cause, where a timely motion for summary judgment was made on grounds nearly identical to that of the cross motion (see Grande v Peteroy, 39 AD3d 590 [2d Dept 2007]). [read post]
29 Jul 2018, 9:01 pm
Such were among the questions raised by the July 18, 2018 decision of the Appellate Division, Second Department, in Cohen v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 6:48 am
" The plaintiffs sued under the First Amendment, claiming this memo was retaliatory.The case is Bennett v. [read post]
24 Jan 2024, 1:19 pm
An unfortunate coincidence revealed the limits to the algorithm in May 2022 when, a week after news leaked that the Supreme Court was poised to strike down Roe v. [read post]
15 Jul 2015, 3:52 am
Bennett of Rehm, Bennett & Moore, had an interesting observation demonstrating just how fact specific these kind of cases can be.He said if it were his case to try, he would look into whether the hammer Bates used in the assault was a required tool for his job, and "that would be the angle" for saying there was a work-connection.The case was Phillip McDaniel v. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 5:00 am
In the case of Olar v. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 10:04 am
”The majority decision stressed that defining human sperm as property may bring with it “a host of other legal rights and issues,” which need not be decided on the facts in this proceeding. [read post]
15 Oct 2015, 1:21 pm
The criteria in Ladd v. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 1:10 am
Facebook Inc carries on business in Australia In Tiger Yacht Management Ltd v Morris (2019) 268 FCR 548 (noted here), the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia ‘observed that the expression “carrying on business” may have a different meaning in different contexts and that, where used to ensure jurisdictional nexus, the meaning will be informed by the requirement for there to be sufficient connection with the country asserting jurisdiction’: [40]. [read post]
25 Jan 2015, 4:00 am
Fraser Health Authority v. [read post]
