Search for: "A----. B v. C----. D"
Results 5141 - 5160
of 10,370
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2012, 12:56 pm
As the judge explains in this opinion, Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides as follows: `A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if: (a) the expert's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; (b) the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; (c) the… [read post]
22 Oct 2023, 9:24 am
That lends considerable weight to the Appellant’s argument that Articles 3(1) (c) and (d) were not satisfied – thereby rendering the property unsuitable. [read post]
21 Aug 2010, 5:42 pm
Near the end of its opinion in Betancourt v. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 2:46 am
On the other hand the cases do show that the General Court has said that where there is (a) average visual and phonetic similarity, but no conceptual similarity (Wesergold), or (b) a number of visual and phonetic features which precluded the signs from being perceived as similar (Ferrero), or (c) no visual or phonetic similarity but a low degree of conceptual similarity (Lufthansa), or (d) a common suffix (Kaul), there may yet be no similarity overall between mark and… [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 8:43 am
The case, New Vision Gaming v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 10:45 am
So, that exception, applicable to both res judicata and collateral estoppel, has four elements: (a) control of both the original and present lawsuit, (b) a proprietary interest or financial interest in the prior judgment, (c) an interest in the determination of a question of fact or a question of law regarding the same subject matter or transactions and (d) notice of participation. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 10:25 am
B. [read post]
10 Jun 2013, 5:13 am
§ 314.70(c), (d), and would not have the same impossibility preemption defense. [read post]
22 Sep 2010, 12:11 pm
§ 213(b)(1). [read post]
1 Sep 2008, 9:46 am
D/B/A LAS COLINAS MEDICAL CENTER v. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 2:46 pm
The Tennessee Supreme Court in Webb v. [read post]
3 Sep 2012, 5:09 pm
De acordo com o ministro-revisor, com essa prática, a direção do Banco Rural descumpriu norma do Banco Central, segundo a qual a classificação de um devedor deve ser revista pelo menos mensalmente, da seguinte forma: havendo atraso de 15 a 30 dias, o grau de risco é reclassificado de A (melhor grau) para B; havendo atraso de 31 a 60 dias, cai para grau C; de 61 a 90 dias, para D; de 121 a 150 dias, para F; de 151 para 180 dias,… [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 6:08 am
Williams v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 7:08 am
In last month’s case (Gowler v. [read post]
28 Dec 2007, 9:49 am
The court reduced the award for mental anguish to $150,000 from $250,000 and directed the district court on remand to allow the defendant to submit an opposition to the plaintiff's application for attorneys' fees under Rule 54(d)(2)(C). [read post]
16 Oct 2018, 3:54 am
Sims – and in Knick v. [read post]
8 Jan 2010, 3:56 am
Vittengal v. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 8:54 am
See Stephens v. [read post]
28 Feb 2022, 1:28 pm
In Frisby v. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 7:08 am
D. 1: SunCare, Inc. converted from a C corporation to a Delaware limited liability company and changed its name to SunCare, LLC. [read post]
