Search for: "State v. L. B." Results 5561 - 5580 of 6,572
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2009, 3:19 pm by WSLL
Salzburg, Attorney General; Michael L. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 6:53 pm
JASON ETTENGER â€" CASE NO. 2008-L-054 (PDF or here) Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 08 MS 000039. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 3:41 pm by WSLL
Salzburg, Wyoming Attorney General; Terry L. [read post]
10 Nov 2009, 12:46 pm by Steve Bainbridge
That trend was reversed following the Supreme Court’s decision in CTS Corp. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 3:00 pm by Sheppard Mullin
 The DOS acknowledged the 2007 case but argued that its interpretation of the statute was supported by the Court of Federal Claims in Grunley Walsh Int’l, LLC v. [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 9:36 am
Does any such use fall within the scope of either or both of:(a) Article 5(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Directive and Article 9(1)(a) of the CTM Regulation; and(b) (assuming that such use is detrimental to the distinctive character of the trade mark or takes unfair advantage of the repute of the trade mark) Article 5(2) of the Trade Marks Directive and Article 9(l)(c) of the CTM Regulation? [read post]
4 Nov 2009, 1:34 pm
However under the tests set out by Arden J in Hanoman v Southwark L B C [2008] AER(D) 146 [para 47] (our note here), there was a collateral contract in this case, “The terms of the collateral contract can be gleaned from the documents signed by Miss Scrowther, the letter sent by Mr Botsford on 3rd October 2006 and the FAQs and the fact that Miss Scrowther signed the authority and paid over the £31,250 to Watermill on completion”. [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 3:25 pm by Meg Martin
Pappas of Davis & Ceriani, PC, Denver, Colorado; L. [read post]