Search for: "Matter of Clark v Clark" Results 861 - 880 of 1,912
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Sep 2014, 2:20 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  If it is pure and potent, it simply does not matter when or where it came from.Here is a description of the crime from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Trottie v. [read post]
28 Aug 2014, 5:57 am by Dennis Crouch
Skaist has also been an adjunct professor at Boalt Hall Law School in Berkeley, CA, at Willamette School of Law in Salem, OR, at Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland, OR, and at Albany Law School. [2] A separate twist is raised by Sotomayor’s concurrence (also expressly by Judge Mayer recently in I/P Engine v. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 12:30 am
• The Court observed that Karum had chosen to sue FPF for breach of confidence in equity and had itself expressly cited the three-step test established in the 1969 English case of Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) [noted here] which had been long adopted by New Zealand courts. [read post]
9 Aug 2014, 11:14 pm
And whether Virginia recognizes the year-and-a-day rule (under which an attacker can only be convicted of murder if the death occurs within a year and a day of the attack) is not clear, though Clark v. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 1:56 am
As it turned out, this dispute didn't really do much to develop doctrine in any of those directions, but that doesn't matter. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 12:24 am
 Mr Justice Roth gave emphasis to the following paragraph from Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41 on the circumstances in which confidentiality is imposed:"It seems to me that if the circumstances are such that any reasonable man standing in the shoes of the recipient of the information would have realised that upon reasonable grounds the information was being given to him in confidence, then this should suffice to impose upon him the equitable obligation of… [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 7:00 am by Bill Marler
Marler Clark has the honor of directly representing 46 and indirectly several more[6]. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 10:01 pm by Bill Marler
Marler Clark has the honor of directly representing 46 and indirectly several more[6]. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 5:08 am by INFORRM
 heard 9 July 2014, (Arden and Christopher Clarke LJJ and Barling J). [read post]
15 Jul 2014, 10:04 am by MBettman
Not surprisingly, it is also wrong as a matter of federal constitutional law. [read post]