Search for: "In INTEREST OF FEW v. State"
Results 6341 - 6360
of 11,580
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2017, 3:34 am
Second, and more importantly for practitioners, Justice Emerson’s opinion is one of the very few New York state court decisions that takes a probing look at the prevailing “substantial benefit” standard for an award of legal fees under Section 626 (e). [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 3:34 am
Second, and more importantly for practitioners, Justice Emerson’s opinion is one of the very few New York state court decisions that takes a probing look at the prevailing “substantial benefit” standard for an award of legal fees under Section 626 (e). [read post]
15 Aug 2016, 4:31 pm
The results were both enlightening and entertaining, and I found myself laughing out loud at a few of the comments. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 12:00 am
Co. v. [read post]
19 Sep 2010, 8:20 am
According to its website, there are nearly 1,500 IHOP restaurants located in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Canada, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. [read post]
30 Mar 2019, 1:11 pm
In the post-eBay v. [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 2:14 am
Having duked the matter out in the United States Patents and Trademarks Office, and subsequently at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, the matter has moved on to the District Court of Virginia, where the decision was handed down only a few days ago.Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 1:24 am
Samsung or Oracle v. [read post]
Apple filing reveals Samsung recently reduced its 2.4% royalty demand for standard-essential patents
5 Apr 2013, 10:17 am
The Ericsson v. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 4:16 pm
More importantly, it was reportedly frustration with the British resolution of 1785 authorizing the Department of Foreign Affairs to open and inspect any mail related to the safety and interests of the United States that led James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and James Monroe to write to each other in code.In fact, in the 1999 decision throwing out the government’s export regulations on encryption in EFF’s case Bernstein v. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 12:38 pm
See EEOC v. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 7:41 am
" [Terry v. [read post]
11 May 2017, 11:45 am
Co. v. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 10:36 am
Suchanek v. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 9:01 pm
For example, a few years ago in Arlington v. [read post]
24 Sep 2018, 2:31 am
Patrick held a one-third membership interest in the former LLC and a one-fifth interest in the latter LLC. [read post]
11 May 2013, 6:00 am
**In passing, Diamond v. [read post]
8 Sep 2006, 6:43 am
Ashcroft, which was adjudicated by the United States of America Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 11:40 am
On that basis, Mr Hardy's state of mind at the time of sending the email amounted to "reckless indifference to the illegality of his act" (Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No 3) [2003] 2 AC 1 ). [read post]
