Search for: "Marks v. State "
Results 8461 - 8480
of 21,695
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2012, 3:19 am
Moreover, "[a] court may freely consider affidavits submitted by the plaintiff to remedy any defects in the complaint, and upon considering such an affidavit, the facts alleged therein must also be assumed to be true" (Kopelowitz & Co., Inc. v Mann, 83 AD3d at 797 [citations and internal quotation marks omitted]). [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 8:45 am
Although the conduct test was not met, the effects test was.The effects test asked whether conduct outside of the United States had a substantial adverse effect on U.S. investors or securities markets, the court noted. [read post]
10 Mar 2014, 5:56 am
General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. [read post]
18 Aug 2022, 9:40 am
Puma v. [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 3:15 pm
Hawaii v. [read post]
1 Jun 2022, 11:16 am
He stated that the High Court judge had erred in determining that targeting “imports a notion of taking deliberate aim at a country. [read post]
25 Nov 2016, 12:35 pm
The case was assigned to District Judge Sarah Evans Barker and Magistrate Judge Mark J. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 9:05 am
Reynolds Tobacco Company v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 9:46 am
Reynolds Tobacco Company v. [read post]
24 Jul 2017, 7:47 am
State v. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 6:07 pm
State v. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 5:24 pm
State Crime Victims Bd., 502 U.S. 105, 116 (1991). [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 9:28 pm
Lowry (1937) and Johnson v. [read post]
30 May 2011, 9:24 am
States, SE & SW Areas Pension Fund v. [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 6:01 pm
Copyright © 2010 Mark Bennett. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 9:38 am
Harrington v. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 2:50 pm
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Ameritech, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 8:37 am
(See Upjohn Co. v United States, 449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981)For communications to be regarded as privileged, they must be treated as privileged. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 8:44 am
Owlpoint, LLC v. [read post]
4 Feb 2007, 8:36 am
Nino Franco Spumanti S.R.L., Cancellation No. 92043953 [Petition to cancel a registration for RUSTICO for wines and sparkling wines, on the ground of fraud, alleging that Respondent "has only ever used the mark on sparkling wines in the United States. [read post]
