Search for: "Defendants A-F" Results 7361 - 7380 of 29,832
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Feb 2018, 3:40 pm by Giles Peaker
In doing so, the Defendant has failed to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of L as required by s.11 Children Act 2004 (Ground 1); ii) The Defendant has failed to produce a lawful assessment of L’s needs and J’s needs as his carer. [read post]
18 Feb 2018, 8:24 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
From the case: In running a particular advertisement without Vanna White's permission, defendants Samsung Electronics America, Inc. [read post]
Notable Defend Trade Secrets Act Developments Just two years after its enactment, the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”) continues to be one of the most significant and closely followed developments in trade secret law. [read post]
16 Feb 2018, 4:50 am by R. David Donoghue
Avery Dennison Corp., 281 F.3d 676, 681 (7th Cir. 2002), the Court held as follows: Bosch’s evidence that the Chairman was not involved in relevant events was persuasive. [read post]
15 Feb 2018, 4:41 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Health plans and insurers, their service providers that act as business associates within the meaning of the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (HIPAA) and employer and other health plan sponsors, fiduciaries, and other management leaders should heed the warnings contained in the new Resolution Agreement (FileFax Resolution Agreement) with former HIPAA business associate FileFax, Inc. announced by the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Office of Civil Rights… [read post]
15 Feb 2018, 3:14 am by INFORRM
The reporting restriction and anonymity order were subsequently lifted by the court and the Plaintiff was ordered to pay the Defendant’s costs. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 2:57 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In re Lehman Brothers Securities & ERISA Litigation, 655 F. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 10:35 am by Eugene Volokh
Freeman, 872 F.2d 907, 911 (9th Cir. 1989) (holding that the following phrases, among others, that defendant copied were not subject to protection: "river wound its way between muddy banks crawling with alligators," "hordes of gold seekers," "shanties and corrugated [iron/steel] shacks … were crowded together," and "beach was strewn with boxes, bales"); see also AcuffRose Music, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 7:21 am by MBettman
Position of the Parties State Defendants’ Position The state defendants argue that in order to challenge a bill based on a single subject violation, a party must have standing [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 7:08 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Although Cox has a point about takedown abuse, the statutory remedy is supposed to be in 512(f), not in raising the bar on copyright owners’ ability to send takedown notices. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 4:00 am by Administrator
Aird & Berlis LLP, 2018 ONSC 7424 [33] The only written warning of the risks associated with proceeding with the defendants’ aggressive tax planning was contained in the Opinion. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 2:24 am by Ben
The defendants argued that ISE had never registered the show for copyright, nor applied for a registration and therefore had no standing to make a claim under section 512(f).This argument was rejected by the US District Court Judge Fitzgerald. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 12:00 am by Jonathan Melfi
., 877 F.3d 687 (6th Cir. 2017), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment in favor of Community Health System shareholders (“Plaintiffs”). [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 9:01 pm by Dean Falvy
The latest party to seek a slice of that action is the right-wing, Euroskeptic, anti-immigration Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany, or AfD). [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 8:28 pm by Thorsten Bausch
Die Gewährleistung der Menschenrechte und die Sicherstellung eines effektiven Rechtsschutzes für die Bediensteten der Staatenverbindung ist eine originäre und substantielle Verpflichtung als Mitgliedstaat dieser neuen Staatenverbindung. [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 7:47 am by Hunton & Williams LLP
American Honda Motor Co., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012), which decertified a nationwide class based on differences in various state consumer laws. [read post]