Search for: "State v. Settle" Results 6541 - 6560 of 15,581
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Dec 2010, 7:34 am by Beth Graham
The question presented was whether the Montana Supreme Court violated the Federal Arbitration Act by refusing to compel arbitration of a dispute between tobacco companies and settling states that courts of other states and territories held arbitrable under the plain terms of the nationwide Master Settlement Agreement. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 7:00 am by Spencer L. Reames
 This rule has its genesis in the Court of Appeals decision of Riggs v Palmer, in which the Court stated “[n]o one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to found any claim upon his own iniquity, or to acquire property by his own crime” (Riggs v Palmer, 115 NY 506, 511 [1889]). [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 3:46 pm
 Microsoft v Motorola was a case where the court could settle terms in the knowledge that their determination would resolve the dispute. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 6:31 am by Robert J. Howard
The Palma Court dismissed the breach of contract cause of action under the well-settled and well-known rule that a  subcontractor generally cannot maintain a breach of contract action against the project owner because there is no privity of contract between them, citing such authorities as Eastern States Electrical Contractors v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 6:31 am by Robert J. Howard
The Palma Court dismissed the breach of contract cause of action under the well-settled and well-known rule that a  subcontractor generally cannot maintain a breach of contract action against the project owner because there is no privity of contract between them, citing such authorities as Eastern States Electrical Contractors v. [read post]
1 Jan 2008, 4:46 pm
In a similar vein, a Washington state court of appeals in HTK Mgm't, L.L.C. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 12:20 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal PracticeImpersonation, Tax Evasion Sentence Upheld; 'Sharp Practice' Not Due Process Violation United States v. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 6:10 pm by Kelly
Highlights this week included: CAFC: Disclosure that merely allows PHOSITA to ‘envision’ the claimed invention fails written description: Goeddel v Sugano (Peter Zura’s 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) (Patent Prospector) Evista (Raloxifene) – US: CAFC upholds decision against Teva: Eli Lilly & Co v Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc (Patent Docs) (The IP Factor) Aranesp (Darbepoetin) – EU: ECJ says ‘no’ to Kirin Amgen, ‘yes’ to… [read post]