Search for: "Doe v. State of Vermont et al" Results 61 - 80 of 80
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Mar 2011, 1:32 pm by Chris Martin
  Excess Underwriters at Lloyd's, London et al vs Frank's Casing, 246 S.W. 42 (Tex. 2008). [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 12:19 pm by Lyle Denniston
IMS Health Inc., et al. (10-779) is an appeal by Vermont state officials seeking to revive a state law that restricted commercial access to and uses of private medical data — here, information about brand-name drugs prescribed by doctors. [read post]
29 Dec 2010, 12:54 pm by Bexis
  In a transparent attempt to hamstring pharmaceutical marketing, the state of Vermont made it illegal for data miners to sell physician prescribing information to pharmaceutical companies. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 7:09 am by Lyle Denniston
Williams, et al. (09-1380) was whether an employee’s case in federal court raising state law issues must be tried only under federal law because they implicate the terms of a labor contract. [read post]
24 Oct 2010, 7:02 am
Had Google gotten their way, Viacom would have had to join forces with Premier League et al to file one appeal brief. [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 11:52 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Moore et al., Moore’s Federal Practice—Civil ¶ 101.40[5][a]. [read post]
22 Mar 2010, 8:03 pm by Carter Ruml
(For help with that, consult the good folks in Morrisville, Vermont. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:19 pm
Kent School District, et al.; Kent School District, et al. v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 6:27 am
Matthews et al., State-by-State Report on Permanent Public Access to Electronic Government Information 2 (Chicago: IL: American Association of Law Libraries, 2003). [read post]
26 May 2009, 1:53 pm
Supreme Court case that decided the presidential election, and by David Boies, who represented former Vice President Al Gore in the same case.The case is Perry et al v. [read post]
21 May 2007, 8:03 am
Rettelle, et al. (06-605).The newly granted case in the Klein case tests whether firms that solicit or accept orders to trade on commodities exchanges -- that is, "futures commission merchants" -- have a right to sue for losses they incur when futures prices are manipulated illegally. [read post]
14 May 2007, 8:10 pm
Today the Connecticut Supreme Court heard arguments from the parties in Kerrigan et al. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 9:08 am
Basic Industries, Inc. (15-CA-17525, et al.; 348 NLRB No. 89) Baton Rouge, LA Dec. 18, 2006. [read post]