Search for: "In Re: Does v."
Results 9261 - 9280
of 30,139
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Nov 2015, 3:26 pm
Inconsistent Verdict of Massachusetts Jury in Car Accident Case Results in New Trial – Rose v. [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 3:15 am
Vaughan v. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 4:29 pm
The case is Charters v. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 3:33 am
In Re Comverse Technology, Inc., 56 A.D.3d 49 (1st Dep’t 2008).In April 2006, a shareholder derivative action, alleging stock options backdating violations, was filed against certain directors and officers of Comverse Technology. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 11:30 am
If you are a criminal defense lawyer and do not know about this case, well, you're not really a criminal defense lawyer. [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 6:46 pm
What does that even mean?) [read post]
7 Feb 2011, 3:15 am
So, why does the USPTO use a different standard? [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 5:23 pm
Note that these are not consecutive steps; we’re working on them concurrently. 1. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 7:16 am
In a decision last week in United States v. [read post]
30 Jan 2009, 3:06 am
The theory is an extension of Lewis v. [read post]
17 Mar 2021, 4:00 am
Courts must ensure that unconscious bias does not infect credibility assessments. [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 2:30 am
He discusses the application of De Keyser principles and the controls imposed by Parliament on prerogative powers to ratify international treaties. 13.05: The hearing has adjourned for lunch and is expected to resume at 14:00. 12.58: The next case referred to is R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Rees-Mogg: James Eadie QC submits that the availability of the prerogative in relation to EU law depends on whether it has… [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 12:24 pm
Aviva Sports, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 5:30 am
See United States v. 1855.6 Pounds of American Paddlefish Meat and 982.34 Pounds of American Paddlefish Caviar, No. 16-cv-3374 (N.D. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 9:31 am
The ruling in Coleman v. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 4:07 pm
Rachid v. [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 12:59 pm
The First Amendment does not protect off-label promotion that is false or misleading.United States v. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 2:16 pm
If you didn't study this case in law school, you're very old or went to a shitty law school. [read post]
28 May 2015, 2:17 pm
It does decently, but not great. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 6:02 am
What does “consisting essentially of” mean? [read post]
