Search for: "FRIDAY v. STATE" Results 6141 - 6160 of 7,164
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jan 2012, 2:05 pm by Steve Hall
The California Supreme Court opinion in People v. [read post]
7 Oct 2016, 2:40 pm
Friday, October 7, 2016 8:30 am - 9:00 am Registration and Continental Breakfast   9:00 am - 9:15 am Welcome and Introduction Jennifer Johnson, Dean of the Law School Amy Bushaw, Chair of the Business Law Committee George K. [read post]
27 May 2014, 12:15 am
In particular he stated that 'there was no suggestion from either party that the Shanks patents were crucial to Unilever’s success. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 11:54 pm by Florian Mueller
For example, one of Apple's patent claims-in-suit has meanwhile been rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and another patent-in-suit is from the same patent family whose European member has unanimously been deemed invalid by ten judges. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 11:36 am by stevemehta
On March 26, 2006, Blix Street’s counsel sent an e-mail to Judge Edmon that stated, “Judge Edmon: the parties reached a settlement at the mediation on Friday, March 24, 2006 and signed a document that can be enforced pursuant to CCP Section 664.6. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 11:36 am by stevemehta
On March 26, 2006, Blix Street’s counsel sent an e-mail to Judge Edmon that stated, “Judge Edmon: the parties reached a settlement at the mediation on Friday, March 24, 2006 and signed a document that can be enforced pursuant to CCP Section 664.6. [read post]
15 Apr 2013, 7:56 am by INFORRM
Neil Turner v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 12/04/2013; Ms Carina Trimingham v Daily Mirror, Clause 1, 11/04/2013; Ms Carina Trimingham v Metro, Clause 1, 11/04/2013; Bath & North East Somerset Council v The Times, Clause 5, 11/04/2013; Warren Hamilton Daily Mai, Clause 1, 11/04/2013; Catherine Whiteside The Scottish Sun, Clauses 1, 5, 11/04/2013; Ms Lynne Hales v Daily Mail, Clause 6, 11/04/2013; Emilie Sandy v The Citizen (Gloucester) v… [read post]
17 Jun 2021, 9:45 pm by Katelynn Catalano
FLASHBACK FRIDAY In an essay in The Regulatory Review, Professor Rachel Rebouché of Temple University argued that June Medical Services v. [read post]
4 Aug 2024, 10:40 am by Giles Peaker
UO v London Borough of Redbridge (2024) EWHC 1989 (Admin) We first saw UO and Redbridge in this judicial review of an unlawful housing needs assessment (HNA) and suitability decision. [read post]