Search for: "Styles v. State" Results 61 - 80 of 5,578
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 May 2013, 5:05 am by Schachtman
Emery Reimbold & Strick Ltd., [2002] EWCA Civ 605, [2002] 3 All E.R. 385 (holding that copying does not invalidate a court’s decision); id. at para. 41 (citing United States v. [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 1:03 pm by Jon Robinson
  Note: the Ninth Circuit styled this case as Roberts v. [read post]
8 Jan 2007, 12:02 am
Fun with fundamentals, US-styleRight: the seal of the United States Patent and Trademark OfficeThe IPKat, still behind with his Christmas reading, has at last had the chance to examine Fundamentals of United States Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patent, Trademark, the second edition of which was published by Kluwer Law International towards the close of 2006. [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 6:25 am by Mark S. Humphreys
As stated by the Dallas Court of Appeals in 1993, in the opinion styled, Jones v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 4:53 pm by Beard Stacey Trueb & Jacobsen, LLP
Alaska State Troopers report that the F/V CONFIDENCE and F/V SHADY LADY collided on March 24, 2010. [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 12:03 pm by Gene Quinn
On February 17, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order in Hyatt v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 4:53 pm by Beard Stacey Trueb & Jacobsen, LLP
Alaska State Troopers report that the F/V CONFIDENCE and F/V SHADY LADY collided on March 24, 2010. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 12:13 pm by Robert Laplaca
  Perhaps the greatest dance of all has been the state legislatures side-stepping the skill v. chance issue. [read post]
27 Jan 2012, 9:12 am by Bexis
Weeks, its first appearance in a state high court.We're willing to bet that the defense briefing in Weeks represents the current state of the art in defending/arguing against Conte-style liability. [read post]
23 Jun 2015, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
It should be born in mind that in L’Oréal v eBay the CJEU stated 3 things: “The fact that the service provided by the operator of an online marketplace includes the storage of information transmitted to it by its customer-sellers is not in itself a sufficient ground for concluding that that service falls, in all situations, within the scope of Article 14(1) of Directive 2000/31” (at [113]). [read post]