Search for: "State v. Good Bear"
Results 781 - 800
of 5,192
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 May 2013, 8:06 am
Next week, the Justices get time off for good behavior, so you’ll have to find some other way of wasting a perfectly good tenth of a billable hour between now and May 14. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 10:39 pm
Many states still completely outlaw it. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 10:56 pm
As Baroness Hale said at paragraph 73: It is not statute, but the common law, indeed the rule of law itself, which imposes upon the Secretary of State the duty to comply with his own stated policy, unless he has a good reason to depart from it in the particular case at the particular time. [read post]
8 Jun 2017, 8:30 am
The court found that Michigan failed to allege that M22 had threatened to sue the state for trademark infringement, or that the state was planning to engage in any conduct that would give rise to a trademark infringement suit by M22 (such as selling goods or services bearing the M22 marks). [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 3:43 am
The Court’s judgment It was not in dispute between the parties that the Infringing Products did bear Audi and VW’s logos, without their consent, and were traded on the Fruugo platform. [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 4:26 pm
As I say it is very hard to tell a good lie. [read post]
6 Mar 2007, 3:23 pm
The Struhs case bears watching. [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 9:55 am
In the U.S. case Bouchat v. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 6:45 pm
Further, state that the judge is obligated to hear all facts that bear on the risk of abuse or harm. [read post]
30 May 2015, 10:01 pm
While it’s been difficult to wait for the past eight months, we are now confident that the trial of the United States of America v. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 10:37 am
Lumpkin On May 31, 2016, the US Supreme Court ruled in United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
24 Apr 2021, 6:07 am
United States Dep't of Labor, 477 F. [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 12:59 pm
United States v. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 12:10 pm
In some cases, what's good for Apple is also good for the industry at large. [read post]
20 Sep 2008, 3:02 pm
See blog here, discussing United States v. [read post]
30 Dec 2010, 3:43 am
The court’s conclusion with respect to the penalty imposed by the arbitrator: the remedy of reinstatement without back pay and benefits was well within the arbitrator ‘s authority.On a related point, in Greenberg v Bear, Stearns & Co. [read post]
6 Jan 2010, 5:47 am
In Connecticut State Dental v. [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 4:54 pm
[An overlooked part of United States v. [read post]
13 Aug 2018, 9:34 am
” (Ashcroft v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 5:34 am
Under common law a mark is protectable through its use, or as was stated by Justice Pitney in United Drug Co v Theodore Rectans Co: "...the right to a particular mark grows out of its use, not its mere adoption; its function is simply to designate the goods as the product of a particular trader and to protect his good will against the sale of another's product as his". [read post]
