Search for: "I v. B"
Results 9361 - 9380
of 24,601
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2012, 7:54 pm
Tough Mudder, LLC v. [read post]
28 Jun 2015, 5:37 am
Oasis Goodtime Emporium I, Inc v City of Doraville, 2015 WL 3658847 (GA 6/15/2015) The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.gasupreme.us/sc-op/pdf/s15a0146.pdfFiled under: Adult Entertainment Facilities, Current Caselaw Tagged: adult uses, sexually oriented businesses [read post]
25 Sep 2012, 7:00 am
This was made clear in BMC v. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 3:56 am
The law firm contends it is owed legal fees by Chang in the principal amount of $438,31 I .19 for legal services rendered in pursuit of three related cases involving Chang as follows: Citidress II Cora. v, 207 Second Avenue Realtv Carp, , Index No.121848199 ("Citidress"), Gold Citv Commercial Bank v. 207 Second Avenue Corp, Index No. 104319 /93 ("Gold City") and Janet Chang, as assignee v. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 3:13 am
Co. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 2:27 pm
’ The classic action of passing off is based on the trinity of (i) goodwill, (ii) misrepresentation to the public, and (iii) damage to the claimant, as was reaffirmed in the 'Jif Lemon' case (Reckitt & Colman Ltd v Borden Inc [1990] UKHL 12). [read post]
27 Dec 2007, 5:10 am
Higueros v. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 1:43 am
Bernard v Meisuria. [read post]
17 May 2025, 3:00 pm
That was done by the Supreme Court of Canada in Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. [read post]
23 Feb 2009, 2:24 pm
Cheval Bridging Finance Ltd v Bhasin and others [2009] EWCA Civ 1613. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 4:14 pm
In Mayo Collaborative Services v. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 12:39 pm
(Code Sec. 6662(i)(1)) Code Sec. 6664 's reasonable cause exception doesn't apply to the Code Sec. 6662(b)(6) penalty. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 8:40 pm
Marshall. http://t.co/Jht3buj B-MD: Whether debtor is a "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) is a federal question independent of state law rules. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-MD: Debtor is "business trust" per §101(9)(A)(v) if "primary purpose" is to carry on business & not to preserve res. http://t.co/BD1KjrL B-NJ: §506(b) applies only to postpet. int/fees/costs; prepet.… [read post]
20 May 2016, 10:07 am
Silbey: one of the productive comparisons b/t Anita Allen’s and other work was that Allen discussed harm to individuals v. harm to systems or organizations. [read post]
17 Nov 2016, 6:57 am
” (See Celle v. [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 7:33 am
I don’t think the government has nailed down how common (a) and (b) are. [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 3:30 am
It’s a case called Minarsky v. [read post]
13 Jul 2018, 3:30 am
It’s a case called Minarsky v. [read post]
19 Dec 2013, 6:00 am
Durrant v Avon & Somerset Constabulary [2013] EWCA Civ 1624This is not housing law, not even close, but is an important decision on procedure that follows on from Mitchell v News Group Newspapers. [read post]
20 Feb 2015, 8:56 am
See 35 U.S.C. 282(b). [read post]
