Search for: "Litman v. Litman"
Results 81 - 100
of 330
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jul 2008, 1:11 pm
Kevlin and Jessica Litman, Trademark and Unfair Competition Law; Cases and Materials (4th ed. 2007). [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 3:48 pm
Kevlin and Jessica Litman, Trademark and Unfair Competition Law; Cases and Materials (4th ed. 2007). [read post]
28 Jun 2008, 2:49 pm
Koke Co. of America, 242 U.S. 143 (1920) and Peaceable Planet v. [read post]
15 May 2011, 8:06 am
From the Maine Antique Digest: [Jessica] Litman claimed that she was “a little disturbed by the reasoning in the decision,” because it doesn’t “take into account the standards of the art world in which you can add something important even when you are ripping off someone else. . . . [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 12:13 am
See also New West Corp. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2023, 4:00 am
Rule, Preserving Sacred Sites and Property Law, (August 7, 2023).Mark Satta, Commercial Discrimination as Religious Messaging in 303 Creative v. [read post]
15 Jun 2017, 4:31 am
” In The American Prospect, David Dayen considers Henson v. [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 5:56 pm
Champion Spark Plug Co. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 7:31 am
Plus, we get a peek at an upcoming bonus episode with Professors Leah Litman and Michele Goodwin, discussing the history of abortion regulations in light of Box v. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 1:32 pm
Inc. v. [read post]
14 May 2019, 3:22 am
The Supreme Court made clear on Monday that Roe v. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 1:47 pm
Co. v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 1:09 pm
Leah Litman is an assistant professor of law at UC Irvine School of Law. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 1:03 pm
Thereafter, the Third Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Litman v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 7:14 am
Inwood v. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 2:48 pm
Bell v. [read post]
3 Sep 2021, 7:36 am
Here’s the Friday morning read: The Justices Are Telling Us What They Think About Roe v. [read post]
18 Dec 2015, 12:36 pm
17 Jul 2020, 12:02 pm
Mazars Is a Victory for Rule of Law By Quinta Jurecic, Managing Editor, Lawfare Quinta Jurecic writes that the Supreme Court’s decision in Mazars v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 2:54 am
In Reisner v Litman & Litman, P.C. 2012 NY Slip Op 03428 Decided on May 1, 2012 The Appellate Division, Second Department reverses and issues a blanket finding that neither the County nor the Contractor "could" have been liable. [read post]
