Search for: "Label v Label"
Results 9141 - 9160
of 13,305
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Feb 2011, 8:47 am
(Eugene Volokh) From Bologna v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 12:27 pm
Formalized v. [read post]
7 Nov 2013, 11:27 am
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC v. [read post]
24 Apr 2007, 8:01 am
Harper v. [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 5:43 am
Moore v. [read post]
7 Nov 2013, 11:27 am
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 10:00 am
In Zubulake v. [read post]
9 Aug 2021, 6:15 am
Co. v. [read post]
26 May 2021, 11:48 am
Susan Spath Hegedus, Inc., v. [read post]
20 Aug 2014, 9:50 am
., Oppenheimer v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 12:00 pm
More recently, the Supreme Court in Riegel v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 7:16 pm
Holder, Fedorenko v. [read post]
2 Dec 2013, 8:09 am
These included: (1) the font size and prominence of the notice; (2) the label used to denote the charge and whether such a label would confuse patrons; (3) whether the purpose the charge and manner in which the charge is calculated are described on the bill; (4) whether the notice discloses the portion of the charge that is being distributed to the service staff and informs that patrons to leave an additional payment as a tip; and (5) whether there exists a separate line for… [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 9:02 pm
If a senator asked a specific question—such as whether the nominee thinks Roe v. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 6:47 pm
The parties were in agreement that the eight-factor test, articulated by the Missouri Court of Appeals in Nunn v. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 5:45 am
Shoun v. [read post]
7 Jan 2022, 9:34 am
In determining whether an advertising claim is false or misleading, sections 52(4) and 74.03(5) of the Competition Act provide that the general impression of a representation, which can include the overall impression to consumers created by images, logos or packaging and labelling, is also relevant. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 12:27 pm
Newton v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 12:59 pm
” Currier v. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 2:11 pm
This is intended to limit the effect of Thomas v. [read post]
