Search for: "State v. Sullivan"
Results 521 - 540
of 2,485
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2008, 9:34 pm
In addition to its more major problems, NMCCA's opinion in United States v. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 4:30 am
Here in the United States, Samsung is also running into IP trouble with its Galaxy tab. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 10:11 am
Kent State Univ., 212 F.3d 1272, 1283 (Fed. [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 11:33 am
On Tuesday, February 20, 2018, the New York State Court of Appeals ruled in a 6-0 judge opinion in Heeran v. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 7:53 am
In Sullivan v. [read post]
22 Jan 2023, 9:01 pm
In addition, on December 21, 2022, the New York DFS proposed guidance for New York state-regulated banking and mortgage institutions relating to management of material financial risks from climate change. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 9:01 pm
These include the following, among other indicators: (i) the acquirer is “well-capitalized” and the resulting institution will be “well-capitalized”; (ii) the acquirer has a Community Reinvestment Act (the “CRA”) rating of Outstanding or Satisfactory; (iii) the resulting institution will have total assets of less than $50 billion; (iv) the acquirer has composite, management and consumer compliance ratings of 1 or 2; and (v) the acquirer has… [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 4:09 pm
A case from the Third Department - Matter of Humane Socy. of United States v Fanslau, 2008 NY Slip Op 0668, indicates yes - partially. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 10:51 am
I would affirm the trial court's order.In State of Indiana v. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 8:01 am
In 1963, the Court held in Bantam Books v. [read post]
1 Jun 2007, 5:16 am
Sullivan v. [read post]
2 Oct 2013, 7:30 am
Sullivan, a summary order issued on September 17. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 6:22 am
On the same day that the Court of Appeals decided this appeal, it issued United States v. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 6:39 am
In United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 6:35 am
Thus, merely because an employer is headquartered in CA, that does not make the employer subject to suit under the UCL for alleged wrongs entirely occurring somewhere else.The case is Sullivan v. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm
In the Court of Appeal Moses LJ, with whom Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony MR and Sullivan LJ agreed, concluded that the discrimination was indirect rather than direct. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 9:27 am
In 2006, in Jones v. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 12:20 pm
In Maples v. [read post]
5 Apr 2024, 10:13 am
The defense law firm’s name is Sullivan Johnson. [read post]
