Search for: "Sales v. State" Results 5201 - 5220 of 21,137
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2010, 8:50 am by Roger Alford
by Roger Alford The Eleventh Circuit in United States v. [read post]
15 Jun 2008, 5:29 pm
The Sunday Indy Star column, Behind Closed Doors, has this item today on tomorrows oral arguments in the case of State of Indiana v. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 4:21 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Such speculative allegations of what Lisi might have done differently, made with the benefit of hindsight, do not suffice to establish the causal link necessary to state a prima facia claim of legal malpractice. [read post]
Meade J has also stated that any decision the court makes on the FRAND royalty amount the iPhone maker must pay would apply worldwide, not just to its UK sales (in line with the UK Supreme Court decision last year in Unwired Planet v Huawei). [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
Count V: Trademark Infringement - Apple has a bunch of trademarks. [read post]
23 Jan 2011, 9:29 am by Peter Hirtle
  Or so it seemed until the Supreme Court recently split in Omega Watch v. [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 4:10 am
The Appellate Division also noted that "this basic information as to state employees, as well as public school teachers in this state, is accessible by anyone for any purpose on the Internet. [read post]
12 May 2009, 10:13 am
A  Ninth Circuit panel today split over an interesting Commerce Clause issue relating to a federal criminal statute in US v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 6:44 am by Alexis Yee-Garcia
On February 29, 2016, the Supreme Court denied certification in Harman International Industries Inc. et al. v. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 12:57 am by The Editor , CMS
Later that day Mr Devani sent an e-mail setting out his terms and conditions in writing and explaining that a sale had been agreed and payment of the commission was due upon exchange of contracts but payable from the proceeds of sale. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 12:06 pm by Eric
Oct. 12, 2012): "I find plaintiff has failed to state a claim for copyright infringement. [read post]