Search for: "SELLERS v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA"
Results 61 - 80
of 137
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Nov 2016, 7:02 am
It is unknown whether the State will seek review of this ruling in the North Carolina Supreme Court, including a possible reconsideration of its prior ruling on the good faith exception under the North Carolina Constitution. [read post]
11 Oct 2016, 12:32 pm
The post Drug Users, Drug Sellers, and Probable Cause appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law. [read post]
11 Oct 2016, 12:32 pm
The post Drug Users, Drug Sellers, and Probable Cause appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law. [read post]
19 Jun 2016, 4:00 am
https://t.co/k2wjCVWDWj -> Oracle v. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 4:00 am
Link to US Scotus opinion on enhanced damages in patent cases , Halo v Pulse https://t.co/vpXI1MQmc4 -> Cable companies launch court battle against 'free TV' Android box vendors https://t.co/nXbDK1iEx6 -> Courtroom to riches? [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 7:55 am
The post Bartenders’ Duty to Cut Off Service to Intoxicated Patrons appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 7:55 am
The post Bartenders’ Duty to Cut Off Service to Intoxicated Patrons appeared first on North Carolina Criminal Law. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 10:28 am
Beverage Systems of the Carolinas, LLC v. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
Regular in-state purchases insufficient.Rawlins v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 3:29 pm
Potential inducers of patent infringement here could be the sellers of the 3D printers, someone providing CAD files of the patented device, or websites that sell or share various CAD files that instruct the 3D printer to make the patented invention.IPBiz notes In a 6-2 decision in June 2015, the United States Supreme Court in Commil USA, LLC v. [read post]
3 Nov 2015, 8:01 am
Arnold is admitted to practice in all state courts in North Carolina, in the United States Federal Court for the Western District of North Carolina, in the North Carolina Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and in the Fourth Circuit United States Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. [read post]
25 Oct 2015, 9:49 am
When the Board pressed funeral homes for preneed records, the Association insinuated to State Board members that they could have personal liability exposures pursuant to North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 12:02 pm
North Carolina has a products liability statute, but as the court states, it is “not a model of clarity. [read post]
12 Oct 2015, 9:29 am
See e.g., Baraukas v. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 9:19 am
Rule 23 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure contains no such provision, Nobles v. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 9:19 am
Rule 23 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure contains no such provision, Nobles v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 12:19 pm
Private nuisance: Again, the general rule is that a seller of a product is not liable for a private nuisance caused by the use of that product after it has left the seller’s control, a rule that has been applied in asbestos cases, “even though that hazard exists even with the intended use of the asbestos-containing product. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 11:20 am
Design Resources, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jun 2015, 5:00 am
§ 2254(d)(1) when it granted habeas relief on the ground that the North Carolina state courts unreasonably applied "clearly established" law when they held that third-party religious discussions with jurors did not concern "the matter[s] pending before the jury. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 7:40 am
Some North Carolina agencies are making the switch. [read post]
