Search for: "State v. Holderness"
Results 7821 - 7840
of 8,253
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Oct 2008, 1:39 am
United States v. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 7:08 am
Let's face it, we'd much rather get the stuff we want rather than those ugly sweaters and hideous candlestick holders. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 7:08 am
Let's face it, we'd much rather get the stuff we want rather than those ugly sweaters and hideous candlestick holders. [read post]
21 Oct 2008, 7:08 am
Let's face it, we'd much rather get the stuff we want rather than those ugly sweaters and hideous candlestick holders. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 8:33 am
Western World Insurance Company v. [read post]
18 Oct 2008, 10:47 am
"The certificate of insurance, relied upon by Home Depot and which expressly stated that 'it is issued as a matter of information only and confers no rights upon the certificate holder,' was insufficient to support Home Depot's contention that it was an additional insured under the policy (see Cendant Car Rental Group v Liberty Mut. [read post]
17 Oct 2008, 12:00 am
The new test, set forth in Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 10:45 pm
In Travelers Casualty and Surety Co. v. [read post]
14 Oct 2008, 5:55 pm
Part of the ploy in getting these free agents is displaying the seeker team's brand new, or newly renovated, state of the art facility. [read post]
13 Oct 2008, 12:12 pm
ECJ clarifies rules relating to notice: K-Swiss Inc v OHIM (Class 46) EU Competitiveness Council resolution against counterfeiting and piracy (Class 46) EU states back three-point anti-piracy plan (Managing Intellectual Property) Fuel cells and wind power lead European patent filings for clean energy technology (Green Patent Blog) More non-minor geographical indicator (GI) amendments published (Class 46) No sign of any Community patent progress, despite Verheugen's optimism… [read post]
12 Oct 2008, 2:06 pm
This means that the income on the contract is treated as ordinary income to the holder of the annuity contract (the corporation). [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 10:16 am
In Forbes v. [read post]
11 Oct 2008, 10:16 am
In Forbes v. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 5:16 pm
I'm no Talmudic scholar, but I'd imagine the original copyright holder is He who is called I Am. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 3:18 am
Roberts does note that this holding is contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Luther v Countrywide earlier this year. [read post]
9 Oct 2008, 7:53 pm
In the US, it was found in the 1990s that a prohibition on automatic telephone direct marketing that applied to political campaigning was constitutional: the case is Van Bergen v Minnesota 59 F.3d 1541 (8th Circuit CA). [read post]
9 Oct 2008, 6:14 pm
See Wyeth v. [read post]
9 Oct 2008, 12:54 am
Under State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 10:41 pm
The complaint was filed in the face of many decisions of federal courts in the United States holding that a non-commercial "gripe" site about a trademark holder may use a domain name in the form www.trademark.com so long as the site itself is not confusing about whether it is sponsored by the trademark holder. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 4:29 pm
Davis (2001) and Clark v. [read post]
