Search for: "Defendant Doe 2"
Results 7861 - 7880
of 40,593
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jun 2024, 9:54 am
And, trademark-specific question, does that mean that trademark infringement claims are also not worrisome, or does the difference between denying the benefits of registration and the full suppression/punishment of infringement (and sign ordinances) matter? [read post]
20 Feb 2021, 6:38 am
" The Met does it every year, and has an established process in place (this is from Hollein's piece):"The criteria for deaccessioning works in the collection have been consistent for decades and include: (1) the work does not further the mission of the Museum; (2) the work is redundant or a duplicate; (3) the work is of lesser quality than other objects of the same type in the collection; and (4) the work lacks sufficient aesthetic merit or historical… [read post]
11 May 2022, 6:18 am
2. [read post]
15 Aug 2018, 6:30 am
Julie Carnes defends that position in a concurrence to the denial. [read post]
20 Dec 2023, 6:03 am
§ 230(c)(2). [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 11:53 am
Hecht, a Connecticut [*2] attorney, to draft a quitclaim deed conveying the first parcel to him. [read post]
31 Jan 2007, 5:34 am
In this case, the Fourth District certified the following to the Florida Supreme Court as a question of great public importance: WHERE THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT OBJECT TO THE PROOF OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS AT THE SENTENCING HEARING, BUT DOES TIMELY RAISE THE OBJECTION IN A RULE 3.800(b)(2) MOTION, DOES THE STATE, AFTER REVERSAL OF THE SENTENCE, HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO PROVE THE PRIOR CONVICTIONS? [read post]
15 May 2013, 2:01 pm
(followed by points 2-17)While I agreed with many of his examples, that was not one of them. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 11:28 am
2) Does the Order Contravene the Communications Decency Act? [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 8:53 am
”), col. 2 ll.14–17 (“A film is epitaxially grown in a two step process. . . . [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 9:01 pm
’774 patent col. 2 l. 58–col. 4 l. 38 (ex parte reexamination certificate). [read post]
11 Jan 2023, 7:19 am
The Supreme Court considered the interpretation of G.S. 15A-1201(d) de novo, and noted that while the statute mandates who to address (defendant) and what must be determined (whether defendant understands the consequences of waiving a jury trial), the statute does not specify the procedure the trial court must follow. [read post]
9 Feb 2008, 10:05 am
" FDA amicus br. at 2. [read post]
29 Jul 2009, 6:03 pm
My colleague Ilya Somin insightfully defends against allegations of the death of Moneyball in baseball and legal academia — largely making the point that larger institutions with larger payrolls imitating the successful elements of the strategy. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 6:47 am
Nevertheless, court of appeals will not exercise discretion to correct error in this instance because defendant fails to show that error seriously affects fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings for the following reasons: (1) defendant makes no specific claim of Booker error; (2) sufficient evidence supports counts of conviction and sentence was substantively reasonable; (3) there is no indication sentence is insufficiently supported by evidence;… [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 8:59 am
The possibility of Court enforcement does not change this fact. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 5:00 am
The jury found him guilty on multiple counts: 2 counts of aggravated assault as domestic violence; 5 counts of aggravated domestic violence; 2 counts of influencing a witness; and 1 count of kidnapping. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 5:00 am
The jury found him guilty on multiple counts: 2 counts of aggravated assault as domestic violence; 5 counts of aggravated domestic violence; 2 counts of influencing a witness; and 1 count of kidnapping. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 11:54 am
The Mohawk crew does not provide any sleeping mats, though they do give each detainee a blanket and a towel.While the defendants were on the Mohawk, there were numerous rain squalls, which caused the deck to become wet. [read post]
20 Jan 2013, 3:17 pm
The unrefuted admissible evidence does not establish that employees of defendant Hospital departed from good and accepted standards of care in their care and treatment of plaintiff. [read post]
