Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 601 - 620
of 8,221
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 Supersedes §22 of the Securities Act of 1933: Katz v. Gerardi
7 Apr 2009, 8:00 am
In Katz v. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 2:27 pm
Supreme Court case in Golan v. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 9:00 am
Holder (11-135), and Khalid v. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 5:00 am
But PK states that Stock was not authorized to provide such a license. [read post]
4 May 2021, 1:42 am
In November 2020, the Dusseldorf Regional Court decided to refer to the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) two sets of legal questions: one about the component-level licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs) and another about the application of the Huawei v. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 1:45 pm
Even former United States Attorney General Eric Holder recently expressed his belief that marijuana “ought to be rescheduled. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 6:33 am
Holder and Florence v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 4:46 pm
Some important take-away points from the majority opinion Satisfying a compelling state interest: When it comes to denying a First Amendment expression claim owing to a finding of a compelling state interest, that, too, is quite rare — Holder v. [read post]
3 Aug 2021, 1:19 pm
In PennEast Pipeline Co. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 6:04 am
Two days later, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will finally hold its postponed (due to Hurricane Ida) hearing in Continental v. [read post]
16 Jun 2016, 5:43 am
See United States v. [read post]
11 Apr 2024, 12:15 am
Han v. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 7:22 am
Some state statutes sweep broadly, like the Georgia law at issue in Moncrieffe v. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 1:01 am
Chief Justice Morrison Waite In United States v. [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 5:44 am
Here is an interesting case from Missouri: In Rodgers v. [read post]
14 Apr 2011, 2:15 am
Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Sony Supply Chain Solutions (Europe) BV, formerly Sony Logistics Europe BV (Case C-153/10); [2011] WLR (D) 130 “A person who made customs declarations in his own name and on his own behalf could not rely on a binding tariff information of which he was not the holder, but which associated company on whose instructions he made those declarations. [read post]
6 Apr 2009, 5:06 pm
Holder, No. 01-cv-01854 (D. [read post]
10 Feb 2016, 1:20 am
One still has to appreciate that the copyright holder can at any time reassert their rights, and thus the copyright in the works is newly resurrected (although, as evident from the above, was never gone to begin with).Our cousins in the United States do accept the abandonment of copyrights in works. [read post]
11 Jan 2013, 8:19 am
See London Drugs Ltd. v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 6:28 am
AC34983 - State v. [read post]
