Search for: "State v. Rossi"
Results 41 - 60
of 118
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Apr 2010, 11:04 am
The latter finding breaks from previous case law in the Garden State, which in 2001 found in Gray v. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 6:00 am
In Matter of Rossi v. [read post]
5 May 2021, 6:25 am
id=1497436 12:45 – 1:00: Opening (Lillian Alvernaz, Indian Law Section Chair; James Taylor, Criminal Law Section Chair; Sam Alpert, State Bar of Montana) 1:00 – 2:45: The Death Penalty in State & Federal Courts Panelists: Michael Donahoe, Deputy Federal Defender, Federal Defenders of MontanaSK Rossi, Owner, Central House Strategies Gary Mitchell, AttorneySession Moderator: James Taylor, Managing Attorney, Tribal… [read post]
10 Apr 2021, 7:58 pm
In Horvath v. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court, Republic of Arg. v. [read post]
7 May 2022, 9:08 am
Recalling the ruling given by the International Court of Justice itself in 2012, in the case of the Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 11:45 pm
Additionally, Judge Fogel points out under a prior case, Rossi v. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 6:59 am
Law Lessons from STATE OF NEW JERSEY V. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 3:37 am
Wong and United States v. [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 3:57 am
Some Appellate Division decisions, on which the Appellate Division here relied, have applied strict privity to estate planning malpractice lawsuits commenced by the estate's personal representative and beneficiaries alike (Deeb v Johnson, 170 AD2d 865 [3d Dept 1991]; Spivey, 138 AD2d at 564; Viscardi v Lerner, 125 AD2d 662, 663-664 [2d Dept 1986]; Rossi v Boehner, 116 AD2d 636 [2d Dept 1986]). [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 5:54 am
See, e.g., Rossi v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 12:16 pm
” Sony Corp. of Am. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 2:00 pm
Furthermore, the applicant had failed to include this claim in his application: the Court clarified that failure to state a claim in the application cannot be compensated by introducing the claim at the hearing (unless the plea is based on matters of law or of fact which come to light in the course of the procedure), as stated by Article 48(2) of the Rules of procedure of the General Court and held in previous case law (Case T‑246/06, Redcats SA v OHIM). [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 9:39 am
Summit Entertainment case: “17 USC 512(f) Claim Against 'Twilight' Studio Survives Motion to Dismiss” and Rossi v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 1:31 pm
In 2004, the Ninth Circuit eviscerated it (in the Rossi case) by requiring plaintiffs to show that senders subjectively believed their takedown notices were abusive. [read post]
11 Dec 2022, 9:56 am
The position of the EUIPO, when it comes to acquired distinctiveness through use in the UK for the purposes of an invalidation action against a registered EU trade mark (EUTM), is that the distinctiveness acquired through use in the UK is not relevant for EU trade mark applications filed after the end of the transition period (December 31st, 2020).However, the now said has not always been entirely clear, since case law (Decathlon v EUIPO (T‑349/19) EU:T:2020:488), states that… [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 3:06 pm
See, e.g., Rossi v. [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 3:37 am
Plaintiff was represented in the bankruptcy proceeding by Jules Rossi, Esq. [read post]
5 Oct 2023, 8:11 am
The US Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in the case Acheson Hotels, LLC v. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 2:07 pm
Rossi, Carmen V. [read post]
