Search for: "Rose v. Sullivan*"
Results 61 - 80
of 106
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Apr 2014, 3:00 pm
But Monday’s argument in POM Wonderful v. [read post]
28 Nov 2007, 4:50 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Paula-Rose Stark of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
28 Dec 2007, 1:02 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Paula-Rose Stark of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 10:12 pm
When the Supreme Court refused to grant cert in Sorich v. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 6:44 am
(Carol Rose has a great article explaining why she thinks this isn’t accurate.) [read post]
26 Dec 2009, 2:59 pm
. * uBID Inc. v. [read post]
16 Nov 2007, 12:29 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Paula-Rose Stark of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 12:54 am
Feb 06, 2007) (NO. 136, 5614/99)Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (David Crow of counsel), and Proskauer Rose LLP, New York (Ian C. [read post]
29 May 2008, 7:47 am
Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Paula-Rose Stark of counsel), for respondent. [read post]
16 Mar 2013, 4:58 pm
On reflection: Dietemann v. [read post]
12 Oct 2007, 10:32 am
Bhutto rose to the challenge, but that's not really the point. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 2:06 am
Times v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 5:15 am
Another noteworthy decision was Animal Welfare Institute v. [read post]
21 Mar 2021, 5:10 pm
Norton Rose Fulbright Data Protection Report had a post “New York State imposes a $1.5 million penalty in cybersecurity breach case”. [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 5:54 am
The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Seila Law v. [read post]
11 Jul 2007, 6:05 pm
But Roe v. [read post]
7 Apr 2021, 5:01 am
Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 579 (1994) (internal citations omitted). [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 9:24 am
Quinta examined whether the Justice Department just admitted doubts over Trump’s oath in its brief on appeal in International Refugee Assistance Project v. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 11:34 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, April 10, 2008 US v. [read post]
9 Aug 2009, 1:21 pm
"The amici cited Judge Leval's citation in Campbell v Acuff-Rose Music, stating that"the goals of the copyright law...are not always best served by automatically granting injunctive relief when parodists [and presumably commentators] are found to have gone beyond the bounds of fair use. [read post]
