Search for: "Character v. State"
Results 681 - 700
of 6,775
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2014, 11:48 am
The Doyle estatewould presumably argue that the copyrights on the characters as portrayed in IV, V, and VI will not expire until thecopyrights on I, II, and III expire. [read post]
25 Jul 2012, 5:44 pm
It was also distinguishable from the use of private property for the purposes of collecting signatures for a petition (Appleby v United Kingdom, no. 44306/98, 6 May 2003) or the general prohibition on a ship entering the State’s territorial waters for campaigning purposes (Women on Waves v Portugal, no. 31276/05, 3 February 2009). [read post]
31 May 2011, 6:53 am
Lynch v. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 8:45 am
First up is Kimble v. [read post]
12 Jun 2017, 9:08 am
State v. [read post]
18 Nov 2008, 2:35 pm
The I/P Updates blog has a a nice breakdown of the questions being referred to the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal following the decision in Symbian Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents. [read post]
3 Feb 2024, 9:52 am
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides:No person [1] shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, [2] who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to… [read post]
17 Jul 2016, 5:16 pm
They were not yet legally married, and the will did not contain a clause stating it was in contemplation of marriage. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 4:43 pm
On July 14, 2009, the Court of Appeals published its Per Curiam Opinion in the consolidated matters of State of Michigan v. [read post]
18 Oct 2018, 2:26 am
Big RedCan copyright vest in mascots and characters? [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 11:42 am
[t]ransacts any business or performs any character of work or service in the State. [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division sustained the lower court's action.The court, citing Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, explained that a defamatory statement constituting "pure opinion" is not actionable under New York State Law because expressions of opinion, in contrast to assertions of fact, are deemed privileged and, no matter how offensive, cannot be the subject of an action for defamation.Here, however, the Appellate Division observed that although the subject email communicated… [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division sustained the lower court's action.The court, citing Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d 271, explained that a defamatory statement constituting "pure opinion" is not actionable under New York State Law because expressions of opinion, in contrast to assertions of fact, are deemed privileged and, no matter how offensive, cannot be the subject of an action for defamation.Here, however, the Appellate Division observed that although the subject email communicated… [read post]
5 Jul 2018, 5:32 pm
R. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 4:31 am
United States v. [read post]
10 Jun 2007, 7:16 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2007, 7:40 am
United States v. [read post]
19 Feb 2014, 7:57 am
The two Supreme Court cases that comprise the bedrock of legal precedent for the third-party doctrine—Smith v Maryland and United States v Miller—do not apply to cell site location data, the court found: We agree with the defendant…that the nature of cellular telephone technology and CSLI and the character of cellular telephone use in our current society render the third-party doctrine of Miller and Smith inapposite; the digital age has… [read post]
Fourth Circuit Rules Against North Carolina State Professor Who Spoke Out Against Diversity Policies
8 Jul 2023, 4:26 am
For example, in Rankin v. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 2:30 pm
People v. [read post]
