Search for: "Banks v. State" Results 6201 - 6220 of 15,806
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2019, 3:50 am by Edith Roberts
First up is Guerrero-Lasprilla v. [read post]
6 Dec 2021, 5:23 am by Jocelyn Hutton
Bott & Co Solicitors v Ryanair DAC, heard 20 May 2021 In the matter of an application by Margaret McQuillan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland), In the matter of an application by Mary McKenna for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland), and In the matter of an application by Francis McGuigan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland), heard 14-16 June 2021 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 R (on the application of O (a… [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 7:00 pm
And the failures of the United States to protect its own story in its own way may well be quite costly--not in Russia, bit within those states in which the bacillus of Russian counter-storytelling can have debilitating effect on the American effort to promote a rules based international order in its own image. [read post]
29 Jul 2022, 4:10 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Auth., 182 AD3d 970, 971; Matter of Brennan v New York State Dept. of Health, 159 AD3d 1250, 1252; Matter of Trotman v New York State Cts., 117 AD3d 1164, 1165; Matter of Littles v New York State Dept. of Corrections, 61 AD3d 1266, 1268; Matter of Cushion v Brooklyn Botanic Garden, 46 AD3d 1095, 1096; cf. [read post]
17 Sep 2008, 3:15 pm
  Augustus Hand concluded that he couldn't guess at what might be wrong with a legally constituted bank making loans to other banks and setting interest rates for those loans in Raichle v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 2:57 pm by Adi Kamdar and Adi Kamdar
CLS Bank, which covers the patentability of abstract software patents. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 10:00 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
With exquisite timing, the Court of Appeals lays it out for us.The case is United States v. [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 7:30 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
CLS Bank Int'l and its progeny), a patent can be invalidated or an application can be rejected simply by (i) making a high-level analogy between the claimed invention and one that has been previously found to be directed to a patent-ineligible law of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract idea, and (ii) stating in a purely conclusory fashion that the additional elements of the claim are well-understood, conventional, and routine. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 7:52 am by PaulKostro
Nat’l State Bank, 161 N.J. 220, 232 (1999). [read post]