Search for: "In Re: Amendment to Rule 1-26 of the Rules of the Supreme Court Relating to Admissions to the Bar" Results 41 - 53 of 53
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Feb 2020, 9:58 am by MOTP
The trial court enforced the provision, ruling that it was not a penalty because it reasonably estimated the harm that would result from a breach, and actual damages were difficult to predict when the contract was made.1 On those grounds, the court of appeals affirmed.. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
Although the current Divorce Act, enacted in 1985, amended the law relating to the criteria for divorce and spousal and child support and amendments to the current Divorce Act of 1985, which came into force on 1 March 2021 introduced fundamental changes to parenting rights and obligations, the truly radical breakthroughs [read post]
9 Aug 2008, 1:50 am
: (Techdirt), Microsoft Research launches new tools for knowledge sharing: (creativecommons.org), Yet another star singer, Duffy, doesn’t mind file-sharing: (Techdirt)   Events 20 August – Bill Patry speaking on copyright – Melbourne: (Patry Copyright Blog), (LawFont.com), 21 August – Bill Patry speaking on copyright – Canberra: (Patry Copyright Blog), (LawFont.com), 22 August – Bill Patry speaking on copyright – Sydney:… [read post]
19 Aug 2020, 5:48 pm by Russell Knight
  There are many tools of discovery which the Illinois Supreme Court Rules provides. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
25 May 2022, 9:01 pm by Richard Zelichov and Trevor T. Garmey
There is also a private right of action for shareholders to pursue claims for violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 in federal court. [read post]