Search for: "State v. Bui"
Results 5461 - 5480
of 9,824
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Jan 2013, 4:35 am
Hall v. [read post]
27 Jan 2013, 12:46 pm
In a major victory for marijuana rights in California, the state supreme court has declined to hear an appeal from prosecutors on the overturned conviction of a marijuana collective operator in People v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 11:48 am
LaSalle Hotel Operating P’ship, L.P., 380 F.3d 126, 132 (2d Cir. 2004). (...)Precedent guides that if BB&B’s advertising state- ment is literally false, it may be actionable “without reference to the advertisement’s impact on the buying public. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 3:08 am
The case involves the doctrine of First Sale in the United States, which underlies library lending and also allows consumers to buy and sell used books, DVDs, etc. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 1:13 am
Mr L argued firstly that the judge below had failed to apply the test in Kennealy v Dunne [1977] 1 QBD 837 properly.The court is required to be satisfied that the premises are reasonably required, but on the authority of Kennealy v Dunne that reasonable requirement must be something more than a desire but less than a necessity. [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 1:13 am
Mr L argued firstly that the judge below had failed to apply the test in Kennealy v Dunne [1977] 1 QBD 837 properly.The court is required to be satisfied that the premises are reasonably required, but on the authority of Kennealy v Dunne that reasonable requirement must be something more than a desire but less than a necessity. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:22 pm
The Fourth District’s recently-published decision in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 12:00 am
· In Wax v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 9:01 pm
A Counter-Example: Miranda v. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 11:52 am
In light of the decision in Loving et al v Commissioner where the court ruled that the Internal Revenue Service did not have the authority to regulate tax preparers, the IRS has issued the following statement: As of Friday, Jan. 18, 2013, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia has enjoined the Internal Revenue Service from enforcing the regulatory requirements for registered tax return preparers. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 7:30 am
In Pinnacle Museum v. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 3:08 pm
In the case of People v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:06 pm
We already did that in connection with the original decision in Conte v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 11:37 am
Sprigman: Came up in Apple v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 8:51 am
Stated motivation: “Brand is a guarantee for quality. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 7:58 am
The Court’s decision in Laboratory Corporation of America v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 1:22 am
Co. v. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 4:16 am
” Citizens United v. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 10:14 pm
Consumers buy complex technological products for a whole host of reasons, often with no one reason determining the customer's decision. [read post]
16 Jan 2013, 11:00 am
The court of appeals’ opinion in State v. [read post]
