Search for: "Battle v. State" Results 5621 - 5640 of 8,278
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2021, 2:15 pm by JURIST Staff
The bench heard the plea of a 17-year old Delhi student, Aditya Dubey (Aditya Dubey v. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 5:48 am by David Hansen, JD
Our paper has some suggestions, specifically for law libraries, state legislatures, and the courts. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 5:47 am by Rick Klau
Augsburg is a publisher affiliated with the ELCA, which is the largest Lutheran denomination in the United States. [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 6:17 am by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
The Maryland Court of Appeals reached a decision in University of Maryland Medical System v. [read post]
28 Oct 2009, 6:17 am by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
The Maryland Court of Appeals reached a decision in University of Maryland Medical System v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 4:52 am by Tamar Birckhead
 First, I read a provocative essay by Paul Butler, "Poor People Lose: Gideon and the Critique of Rights," in the Yale Law Journal's most recent issue, which contains over twenty articles (all available for free download) by law professors and lawyers reflecting on the 50th anniversary of Gideon v. [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 1:09 pm by Bexis
You betcha.In state after state, whether product liability is common-law or statutory, and whether it’s based on the Second or Third Restatement, courts have refused to allow plaintiffs to make claims asserting that legal products should not have been sold at all. [read post]
21 Mar 2021, 5:10 pm by INFORRM
Norton Rose Fulbright Data Protection Report had a post “New York State imposes a $1.5 million penalty in cybersecurity breach case”. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 1:51 am by INFORRM
The Federal Court would make legal history in the defamation battle between Sydney MP Alex Greenwich and former NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham if it empanelled a jury to hear the case, the Sydney Morning Herald reports. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 7:44 am
Back in mid-January (sorry for the delay in reporting this decision, dear IPKat readers), Mr Justice Arnold handed down his judgment in the long-standing easy trade mark battle: W3 Ltd v Easygroup Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 7.The core issue was whether the sign “EasyRoommate” and its variants which were owned by the Claimant, W3, infringed any of the the easyGroup's EU trade marks. [read post]