Search for: "Borden v. United States District Court"
Results 41 - 54
of 54
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(EPLAW) The Hague District Court: Ex parte injunction granted: Street Surfing LLC v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
(Spicy IP) Design v copyright: need for a clear and rational distinction: Microfibres v Giridhar & Co & Ors (Spicy IP) Madras High Court: jurisdiction - can design infringement case can be filed in Court where plaintiff resides? [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 3:00 am
(Spicy IP) Design v copyright: need for a clear and rational distinction: Microfibres v Giridhar & Co & Ors (Spicy IP) Madras High Court: jurisdiction - can design infringement case can be filed in Court where plaintiff resides? [read post]
7 Jun 2009, 6:20 pm
Borden Larson appealed the decisions of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida that granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants-Appellees Correct Craft, Inc. [read post]
3 May 2009, 8:35 am
United States v. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 12:53 pm
The Second Circuit has held that abuse of discretion is the appropriate standard of review to apply to a district court's ruling on a motion to reduce a sentence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(2).The decision in Unites States v. [read post]
19 Apr 2009, 10:10 am
United States v. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 7:05 am
Among the cases the Court refused on Monday to hear was a plea to clarify what public school teachers, coaches and staff may do, without violating the Constitution, when their students engage voluntarily in prayers at school (Borden v. [read post]
26 Feb 2009, 9:50 am
The United States Supreme Court is set to decide whether it will hear the case of New Jersey High School Coach Marcus Bowden. [read post]
31 Jul 2008, 5:30 pm
Specifically, Tucker II is a slip opinion from a court (in this case, a federal district court) that is not automatically published or obtained by online services, such as Westlaw or Lexis . [read post]
27 Jul 2007, 8:36 am
The United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico has now provided this nice, handy summary of why an individual plan participant whose benefits have been terminated must bring solely a claim for benefits, and cannot press forward with an alternative theory for breach of fiduciary duty. [read post]
25 Apr 2007, 12:04 pm
The Walker court cited Raines v. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 10:15 am
Borden, 7How. 1 (1849), when they ask for an advisory opinion, Hayburn’s Case, 2Dall. 409 (1792), see also Clinton v. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 12:27 am
United States [read post]
