Search for: "State v. B. V."
Results 5421 - 5440
of 41,724
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Oct 2021, 4:30 am
Giving plaintiff 'the benefit of all favorable inferences which may be drawn from [the] pleading,' this Court determines only whether the alleged facts "fit within any cognizable legal theory' (Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York, 86 NY2d 307, 318 [1995], quoting Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). [read post]
15 Oct 2021, 4:30 am
Giving plaintiff 'the benefit of all favorable inferences which may be drawn from [the] pleading,' this Court determines only whether the alleged facts "fit within any cognizable legal theory' (Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York, 86 NY2d 307, 318 [1995], quoting Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 3:45 pm
§ 802(4-B) in 2019. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 1:56 pm
by Anthony B. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 1:40 pm
The “confusion test” – Sections 12(1)(d) and 16(3)(a) and (b) Section 12(1)(d) states that a mark is registrable if it is not confusing with a registered trademark; sections 16(3)(a) and (b) very similarly provided that a mark must not be confusing with a trademark that had previously been know or applied for. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 1:29 pm
Bankers Ass’n v. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 1:27 pm
" [b.] [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 11:58 am
The FTC stated it was prepared to use “every tool at its disposal” to go after bad actors with regard to deceptive endorsements and reviews. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 11:58 am
The FTC stated it was prepared to use “every tool at its disposal” to go after bad actors with regard to deceptive endorsements and reviews. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 11:08 am
§ 841(a)(l) as defined in United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2021, 8:13 am
A v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 3:04 pm
In Keller v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 1:39 pm
B Bad Faith – Conduct on the part of an insurance company that falls outside the requirement that it act with the utmost good faith. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 11:15 am
State v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
Regarding exhaustion, the court reasoned that because the County’s hearing notice did not provide any notice of the CEQA grounds it would used to comply with CEQA, as stated in Tomlinson v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
Regarding exhaustion, the court reasoned that because the County’s hearing notice did not provide any notice of the CEQA grounds it would used to comply with CEQA, as stated in Tomlinson v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:01 am
In Warshak v. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 8:40 am
KF8215.75 .R69 2018 Royster, Judith V. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 5:55 am
Source: Methodology derived from Council on State Taxation, “50-State Study and Report on Telecommunications Taxation,” May 2005; updated July 2021 from state statutes, FCC data, and local ordinances by Scott Mackey, Leonine Public Affairs LLP, Montpelier, VT. [read post]
11 Oct 2021, 1:30 pm
Certified Neutraceuticals Inc. v. [read post]
