Search for: "LaBelle v. LaBelle"
Results 7141 - 7160
of 12,213
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2015, 1:14 pm
City of Chicago v. [read post]
7 Sep 2017, 2:14 pm
This - in essence - is the issue at stake in VCAST Limited v R.T.I. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 5:19 pm
Burchi, James V. [read post]
23 Oct 2015, 1:06 am
This misrepresentation must cause damage to the goodwill of the claimant.It was on the basis of this common-law test for passing off that the Supreme Court ruled (as discussed by this Kat) in May 2015 in the case of Starbucks (HK) and another v British Sky Broadcasting Group, holding that a claim for passing off required proof of goodwill as evidenced by actual business activity by the plaintiff in the jurisdiction. [read post]
20 Sep 2021, 10:06 am
Bidi Vapor, LLC v. [read post]
21 Aug 2015, 8:55 am
Constitutional theory as interpretation places Obergefell v. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 9:46 am
Sonner v. [read post]
8 May 2019, 7:07 am
Board of Forensic Document Examiners, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Aug 2019, 8:20 am
ThermoLife International LLC v. [read post]
3 May 2022, 6:12 am
’: Materializing Cosmetics through Product Labels, 1947-1960Giulia Walter (University of Zurich) and Filippo Contarini (University of Lucerne)Fabrizio De André’s Storia di un ImpiegatoSeminar 5: Visual Legal Iconography (Thursday 23 June 3:00-6:30 pm BST)Valentin Jeutner (Lund University)The Relation between Law, Aesthetics and EmpathyAmanda Perry-Kessaris (University of Kent)Will Future Legal Histories be more Visual? [read post]
18 May 2015, 10:09 am
The Neighbors are back on Art & Artifice, thanks to a post by Rosie Burbidge with an assist from Molly Stech on this controversial privacy v creativity issue. [read post]
14 Mar 2014, 7:06 am
ZDNet reports that she said that Music Rights Australia, which represents artists and music labels through the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), supports Attorney-General George Brandis' call for a review of safe harbour for ISPs. [read post]
3 May 2019, 3:43 am
Surly Brewing Company v. [read post]
9 Jan 2015, 1:05 pm
So this means that no judge is "compelled" to decide X or non-X; instead, the judge has to engage in what Mark Tushnet has accurately labeled "judgment," which presumably includes what, overall, is best for the overall polity. [read post]
7 Mar 2015, 8:58 am
Rob WeinerDuring the Supreme Court oral argument in King v. [read post]
26 Aug 2021, 9:02 am
Klayman v. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 3:36 am
Remember Case C-462/09 Thiuskopie v Opus?]. [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 6:51 am
Opening the "Trademarks and Designs" session after lunch, Katfriend and internationally respected scholar Annette Kur reminded us that some of the things we are prone to label "problems" are often capable of being construed as "opportunities" too. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 3:43 am
TTABlogger comment: Doesn't seems worthy of the precedential label. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 7:12 am
Boessenecker v. [read post]
