Search for: "Virginia C Morris" Results 61 - 80 of 97
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Dec 2010, 1:54 pm by Bexis
  And in cases where punitive damages are sought, consolidation of multiple plaintiffs into one trial is, in our view, a per se violation of Philip Morris USA v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am by Bexis
App. 2007) (adopting Restatement Third §2(c) regarding warnings; “[a]bsent controlling Arizona law to the contrary, we generally follow the Restatement”); Southwest Pet Products, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 2:41 pm by Bexis
Philip Morris USA, Inc., 837 A.2d 534, 541 (Pa. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 10:47 pm by admin
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]
26 Feb 2010, 9:40 am by Robert Oszakiewski
Written comments can also be mailed to Capstone Workshop, c/o NNCO, 4201 Wilson Blvd., Stafford II, Suite 405, Arlington, VA 22230. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 4:46 am
Sidemans and Company Nigeria Limited v Calag Capital Limited (Afro-IP) Poland Personal circumstances in trade mark registration (Class 46) South Africa FIFA v Metcash trade mark case - Owen Dean's response (Afro-IP) South Africa 1 - Ambush Marketers 0: legal framework to help FIFA and 2010 World Cup sponsors protect their rights (Managing IP) Switzerland New developments in Swiss patent law (IP Frontline) Federal Administrative Court finds PARK AVENUE not descriptive for publications (Class 46)… [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 12:49 pm
Owen Hendley, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Virginia School of Medicine who studies the common cold. [read post]
21 Sep 2009, 12:49 pm
Owen Hendley, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Virginia School of Medicine who studies the common cold. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 12:01 pm
Kelly, No. 08-3 In a capital habeas proceeding, the denial of Petitioner's habeas petition is affirmed, where: 1) Petitioner's second trial was not a violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause because the state charged a different gradation offense under Virginia Law in the second indictment; and 2) Petitioner's counsel was not ineffective due to counsel's failure to present certain mitigation evidence, as Petitioner showed no prejudice. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 5:47 am
Source: Lexis/Nexis, Search run on April 20, 2009 for New York Criminal Law News from April 15 to April 20, 2009: 1. [read post]