Search for: "State v. Core" Results 6501 - 6520 of 7,942
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Feb 2024, 6:45 am by Chukwuma Okoli
Nonetheless, Cases like Terre Neuve Sarl v Yewdale Ltd [2020] and Etihad Airways PJSC v Flother [2020] reveal complexities in ascertaining commercial expectations and business efficacy. [read post]
28 Jul 2020, 9:05 pm by Stephen Lee
Citing the 1971 decision in Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 8:20 am
This comes from Pearson v. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 2:07 pm by FDABlog HPM
”  (FDA’s determination of its jurisdiction to issue the ban was challenged and upheld in State of La. v. [read post]
9 Jul 2015, 4:43 pm by INFORRM
Some might think that, given that we had unanimity in Kinloch (AP) (Appellant) v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Respondent) (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 62, the diversity of opinions in the JR38 judgement is a bit surprising. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 9:02 pm by Edward A. Fallone
There is an abundant historical record supporting the conclusion that the United States Constitution was promoted by a core group of political leaders in order to strengthen the national government, and that the Constitution was understood by the people during the ratification debate to do just that. [read post]
23 Dec 2007, 8:00 pm
: (IPEG),More on the implementation of the London Agreement and patent cost reduction in Europe: (Patent Baristas),ECJ rules that EU legislative obligations cannot be enforced in any Member State if that legislation has not been published in the Official Journal in the language of that Member State (Case C-161/06  OlomoucSkoma-Lux sro v Celni reditelstvi Olumouc): (IPKat),EPO fighting complex appl [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 6:28 pm
It is as important to develop legal doctrine that preserves the core principle of asset partitioning among autonomous legal persons (whether public or private). [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 3:44 pm by David Kopel
On Aug. 14, a 2-1 panel of the Ninth Circuit ruled California's confiscation unconstitutional, in Duncan v. [read post]