Search for: "P. v. Long"
Results 521 - 540
of 7,096
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2010, 12:18 pm
On July 13, 2010, the Michigan Supreme Court published Justice Corrigan’s majority opinion in Holman v. [read post]
4 Jan 2024, 1:58 pm
: a collective people just coming out of a tragic period of racial-ethno oppression has projected its own historical experience onto another people just coming out of a long period of violent racial/religious abuse as permanent "guests" of other communities (the thinking at the time) who are recharacterized in the image of the or as the ghostly reappearance of the long gone abusers of the accuser. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 4:52 pm
App. 89, 98, 6 P.3d 58 (2000); see also North Carolina v. [read post]
28 May 2017, 8:30 am
” (p. 191). [read post]
11 Sep 2007, 1:27 pm
., Missouri v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 4:33 am
n a profoundly silly opinion (brought out by a commentator) at SL&P, (U.S. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2019, 2:37 pm
P. 45(c) (“Place of Compliance”)—but it is not. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 5:19 am
In People v. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 8:59 am
See, U.S. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2010, 2:38 am
Colin P. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 8:08 am
As the CJEU’s case law proves, such requirement applies to any kind of trade mark which is indistinguishable from the appearance of the products, be it a three-dimensional trade mark [Procter & Gamble v OHIM, Joined Cases C-473/01 P and C-474/01 P; Mag Instrument v OHIM, Case C-136/02 P and Deutsche SiSi-Werke v OHIM, Case C-173/04 P), a figurative trade mark… [read post]
25 Jan 2022, 9:00 pm
The Supreme Court granted cert. in Kennedy v. [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 4:15 pm
+in+Jones+v. [read post]
26 Nov 2012, 12:34 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:56 pm
P. 185; Panditi v. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 3:04 am
Erica P. [read post]
7 Jun 2008, 12:35 am
Estrada v. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 8:00 am
Dist., 381 P.3d 1188 (Wash. 2016). [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 8:00 am
Dist., 381 P.3d 1188 (Wash. 2016). [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 1:05 pm
(Wells, at p. 1195; Butt v. [read post]
