Search for: "Peter v. Progressive Corp."
Results 61 - 80
of 127
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2011, 8:34 pm
See Atari Games Corp. v. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 4:57 am
Safety Nat’l Casualty Corp. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 3:16 am
Accordingly, the appellant's counterclaims against those defendants were time-barred (see CPLR 213[1], [7]; 214[4], [6]; IDT Corp. v Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., 12 NY3d 132, 139; North Fork Preserve, Inc. v Kaplan, 31 AD3d 403, 405). [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 10:38 am
Peter. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 1:22 pm
The following is a summary review of articles from all over the nation concerning environmental law settlements, decisions, regulatory actions and lawsuits filed during the past week. [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 9:11 am
The Court, citing Chief Judge Cardozo’s seminal opinion in Ultramares Corp. v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 11:15 am
Click Here DECISIONS Rhode Island Airport Corp. and Contractors Fined for Reporting Violations at TF Green Airport. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:20 pm
”On September 9th last year, Stevens engaged in a classic version of advocacy-by-interrogation during the argument of Citizens United v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
Click Here US District Court Decision in US v. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 1:30 pm
Certainly, to the extent that the President’s goal is to select a nominee who will articulate a broad progressive vision for the law, Judge Garland would be a very unlikely candidate to take up that role. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 10:14 am
”On September 9th last year, Stevens engaged in a classic version of advocacy-by-interrogation during the argument of Citizens United v. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 10:47 pm
— Peter N. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 3:55 am
" Progressive Cas. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 4:04 am
China considered sold ‘within the United States’ for infringement purposes: SEB S.A. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 3:17 am
(Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) District Court Oregon: ‘Confidential’ accusation creates substantial controversy sufficient to exercise subject matter jurisdiction: Google Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 3:51 am
(IP tango) ECJ sets aside partial refusal to grant CTM for ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ (progress through technology): Audi AG v OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) (The IP Factor) ECJ: Davidoff criteria for exhaustion apply also if goods were first marketed within the EEA: Makro Zelfbedieningsgroothandel CV and others v Diesel SpA (JIPLP) Time for a general grumble - General Court decisions missing images, no English version: G-Star Raw Denim kft v OHIM, ESGW… [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 4:42 pm
— Imelda V. [read post]
December 21, 2009 – Environmental Law Settlements, Decisions, Regulatory Actions and Lawsuit Filings
21 Dec 2009, 10:57 am
— Imelda V. [read post]
31 Oct 2009, 4:06 pm
Army Corps of Engineers for another look. [read post]
