Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 7721 - 7740
of 15,316
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Aug 2013, 3:32 pm
STAT. 646.473(b). [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 8:35 am
See New York Times Co. v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 8:10 am
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2013)In 2010, the faculty at Penn State Law approved the creation of a new concept course, to be named "Elements of Law". [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 5:09 pm
C. [read post]
28 Apr 2012, 6:52 am
Harrison v. [read post]
14 Jun 2024, 10:53 am
C. [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 9:36 am
Does it make any difference to the answer to question 7 above if:(a) the presentation of the competitor's sponsored link in response to a search by a user by means of the sign in question is liable to lead some members of the public to believe that the competitor is a member of the trade mark proprietor's commercial network contrary to the fact; or(b) the search engine operator does not permit trade mark proprietors in the relevant Member State to block… [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 8:30 am
United States) and Tenth Circuits (Maeher v. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 9:57 pm
b. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 11:15 am
"Although retirement rather than resignation was the triggering event in this instance, Justice Friedman's ruling is consistent with the provisions of 4 NYCRR 5.3(b) of the State Civil Service Commission's Rules for employees in the classified service subject to its jurisdiction permitting the appointing authority to elect to disregard a resignation filed by an employee and to prosecute disciplinary charges and, in the event that such employee is… [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 4:34 am
Thus, the court stated that “an employee does not waive his right under section 16(c) to bring a section 16(b) action unless he or she agrees to do so after being fully informed of the consequences. [read post]
6 Nov 2010, 12:25 pm
On November 3, 2010, in Airgas, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2010, 10:15 am
Last week's decision in Carr v. [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 4:24 am
Automated Solutions Corporation v. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 1:10 pm
§§ 553(b), (c). [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 4:29 pm
In addition to the practical concerns discussed above, the Eisentrager Court found relevant that each petitioner: “(a) is an enemy alien; (b) has never been or resided in the United States; (c) was captured outside of our territory and there held in military custody as a prisoner of war; (d) was tried and convicted by a Military Commission sitting outside the United States; (e) for offenses against laws of war committed outside the United… [read post]
19 May 2015, 12:24 pm
State v. [read post]
7 May 2019, 8:27 am
A recent Court of Appeals decision, State v. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 5:51 am
The board’s position was that Mr. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 5:03 am
KG v Stokke A/S, Stokke Nederland BV, Peter Opsvik and Peter Opsvik A/S was decided on 18 September, but this Kat -- who has been beset by a succession of happy distractions -- has only just got round to writing it up for the weblog. [read post]
