Search for: "Sellers v. Sellers"
Results 5881 - 5900
of 6,090
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2019, 2:50 pm
Here is the provision:Fair and equitable66.501 The Board shall fix royalty and levy rates and any related terms and conditions under this Act that are fair and equitable, in consideration of(a) what would have been agreed upon between a willing buyer and a willing seller acting in a competitive market with all relevant information, at arm’s length and free of external constraints;(b) the public interest;(c) any regulation made under subsection 66.91(1);… [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 10:16 am
Sorrell v. [read post]
30 Sep 2023, 1:40 am
Pareda (https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/seller-forged-basquiats-and-harings-arrested-fraud-charges) United States v. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 1:26 pm
We allege that executives at the highest levels of these companies—concerned that e-book sellers had reduced prices—worked together to eliminate competition among stores selling e-books, ultimately increasing prices for consumers. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 12:23 pm
That started on the very first page, where the court, quoted Perez v. [read post]
9 Nov 2010, 12:03 pm
See Omega S.A. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm
”[44] If a letter of intent falls within the first or second category, courts generally do not consider it binding; but if it falls in the third or fourth category, courts generally consider it a binding contract.[45] For example, in Hunneman Real Estate Corp. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 4:40 am
Officer was entitled to qualified immunity on First Amendment claim relating to livestreaming of a traffic stop, but claim for Town’s policy against livestreaming may proceed Sharpe v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 6:50 am
In Barrick Gold Corp. v. [read post]
22 Jan 2019, 8:56 am
In White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 8:59 am
§115(d)(3)(E)(v)] The database must also be made available “in a bulk, machine-readable format, through a widely available software application,” free of charge to digital music providers, significant nonblanket licensees, authorized vendors of the above, and the Register of Copyrights; and “for a fee not to exceed the marginal cost of providing the database” to “any other person or entity. [read post]
20 Nov 2022, 9:53 am
Supreme Court affirmed in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 11:24 pm
Question Raised: Which Way Did the Money Flow? [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 6:31 pm
Lucent v. [read post]
20 Jan 2014, 4:47 pm
Section 1 – Serious harm A statement is no longer defamatory unless a claimant can show that ‘…its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to [his/her] reputation…’ This section builds on the jurisprudence of Jameel v Dow Jones & Co Inc [2005] EWCA Civ 75 and Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) and is intended to deter trivial claims. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 12:24 pm
Wyeth v. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 2:23 pm
In Salzberg v. [read post]
30 Jun 2016, 10:44 am
De Simone v. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 5:15 am
General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am
Session 2: Establishing the Features of the Consumer The UK courts have in recent years been quite explicit that the consumer is a normative construct, a fiction, and a benchmark. [read post]
