Search for: "Boring v. State"
Results 861 - 880
of 1,917
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Feb 2015, 1:00 am
The story bore a number of similarities to the Ruusunen case. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 9:07 am
Circuit’s recent opinion in PomWonderful, LLC v. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 5:00 am
In addition to checking if the suit was filed in time, don't forget to also check if service was properly perfected.Moreover, remember to also review the complaint to confirm that the suit was filed in the proper county so as to prevent any forum-shopping by the plaintiff.Keep Clients ApprisedIt has been repeatedly stated that the main client complaint on either side of the bar is the lack of timely communication and updates from counsel.Rule of Professional Conduct 1.4 requires that a… [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 2:37 pm
The CJEU’s ruling in DHL v ChronopostThe CJEU made it manifestly clear in its 2011 ruling in Case C-235/09 DHL v Chronopost [see previous Katpost here] that a Europe-wide injunction should only be granted in order to ensure that the proprietor can protect his trade mark, prohibiting only uses which affect or are liable to affect the functions of the trade mark. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 2:21 am
The majority concluded that overall the Extra Division’s reasoning did not provide a satisfactory explanation of their conclusion that the pursuer bore the major share of responsibility. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 4:52 pm
A recent example involved the tort in Wilkinson v Downton [1897] 2 QB 57, which was successfully relied upon in the Court of Appeal in OPO v MLA [2014] EWCA Civ 1277 (currently awaiting judgment on the Defendants’ appeal to the Supreme Court). [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 2:45 pm
Anthony List v. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 2:25 pm
The story bore a number of similarities to the Ruusunen case. [read post]
15 Feb 2015, 12:59 pm
Additional Resources: Villaneuva v. [read post]
13 Feb 2015, 7:42 am
RFA Brands, LLC v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 2:53 am
The Topps Company, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 6:27 am
While the majority of the cards appeared to belong to Alabi or Oguntoyinbo, five of the cards bore the names of other individuals.U.S. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 11:50 am
In Ames v. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 12:53 pm
In XY, LLC v. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 10:23 am
The case is State v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 1:24 pm
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 12:19 pm
The court relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 5:01 am
Davis LJ did not agree that the words “a proportionate part” bore the weight the lessees suggested. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 4:06 pm
In Mosley v. [read post]
