Search for: "Sales v. State" Results 5721 - 5740 of 21,152
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Nov 2021, 10:57 am
  Even in Studio City.The other thing that popped into my head was a line in the opinion from the defendant about why she was not at home during one of the various service attempts: "She stated she was out of town during the process server’s third stake-out on May 14, 2019, as she was in New York City to appear on the Wendy Williams show. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 6:04 am by Betty Lupinacci
  An appeal to the Supreme Court was denied (455 U.S. 1019 (1982). ) So with that victory under its belt, Topps sued Fleer in 1982 stating that the latter company had been “unjustly enriched” by its sale of baseball cards in the period between Fleer’s 1980 victory and the 1981 reversal. [read post]
19 Mar 2013, 4:09 am by Rick E. Rayl
United States (2012) 133 S.Ct. 511, in which the Supreme Court rejected an argument that temporarily flooding someone's property cannot qualify as a taking, as a matter of law. [read post]
17 Aug 2015, 6:36 pm
New York case law is consistent that in absence of privity, a cause of action may not be maintained for breach of contract (Plaisir v Royal Home Sales, 81 AD3d 799 [2d Dept 2011]; CDJ Builders Corp v Hudson Group Construction, 67 AD3d 720 [2009]; Grinnell v Ultimate Realty, LLC, 38 AD3d 600 [2007]; M. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 9:59 am by Gene Quinn
On Monday, March 21, 2016, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the matter of Samsung Electronics v. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 2:02 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
R (on the application of Pathan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 12 December 2019. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 12:37 pm by Rory Little
United States in 2015 (holding that a fish is not a “tangible object” under the federal obstruction of justice statute) and Bond v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 3:01 am by John Jascob
The adviser argued that those holdings created conflicts between state and federal laws regarding the fiduciary duty owed to investors in hedge funds and regarding the imposition of seller liability (Ellrich v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 1:34 pm by John Elwood
Steen (relisted after 2/18 and 2/25 Conferences) Docket: 10-671 Issue(s): Whether the Twenty-first Amendment overrides the Commerce Clause and allows States to discriminate against out-of-state businesses in the sale of alcoholic beverages. [read post]