Search for: "MORRIS S. PHILLIPS'S CASE" Results 81 - 100 of 247
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jan 2012, 3:13 pm by Adrian Lurssen
Why You Should Fight Lawsuits by Debt Buying Companies - by John SkibaFashion Model Mangled by Airplane Propeller is Among Hundreds Injured in Aviation - by Lawyers.comDoors Could Open Wider for Skilled Immigrant Labor - by Ronald ShapiroArizona Consumers Use FDCPA to Challenge Debt Collectors - by Pew Law CenterLegal Alert: Senate Passes National Defense Authorization Act - Ford & Harrison LLPFlorida Supreme Court Says Bank and Homeowner Can't Settle Mortgage Foreclosure Case - by… [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 1:19 pm by Adrian Lurssen
And so, from JD Supra, a year-end update of 2012 updates: Here's what lawyers and law firms have been writing about new laws for 2012. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 12:28 pm by Hopkins
Based upon my own research and the below discussion, I must conclude that, more likely than not, the jurors in the case of Hunter v Phillip Morris resulted in a less than full disclosure of the evidence relating to the outrageous conduct of the tobacco industry. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 12:28 pm by Hopkins
Based upon my own research and the below discussion, I must conclude that, more likely than not, the jurors in the case of Hunter v Phillip Morris resulted in a less than full disclosure of the evidence relating to the outrageous conduct of the tobacco industry. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 6:02 pm
When mega-verdicts against corporate defendants such as McDonald's (hot coffee case), Phillip Morris (tobacco litigation) or Exxon (Valdez oil spill) are reported in cyberspace, the public's view of the judicial system becomes grossly distorted. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 2:48 pm by mikedavidson
Phillip Morris is doing quite well, having won nine of the last 13 cases brought against them. [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 9:12 am by admin
Phillip Garber Jr. is a 16-year old student currently taking classes at the County College of Morris in New Jersey. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 2:12 pm by David Smith
Some of his thoughts in this area are undoubtedly a development of his thinking in the case of Sibthorpe & Morris v LB Southwark (which we reported on here). [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 2:12 pm by David Smith
Some of his thoughts in this area are undoubtedly a development of his thinking in the case of Sibthorpe & Morris v LB Southwark (which we reported on here). [read post]
2 Oct 2011, 10:38 am by Dan Bushell
Phillip Morris, Inc., it interpreted Engle (and applied traditional conspiracy principles) to hold that any class member can sue Lorillard, Liggett, and Vector Group for their role in the conspiracy to conceal information, even though the class member didn't smoke those companies' cigarettes, and can take advantage of the Engle findings. [read post]
2 Oct 2011, 10:38 am by Dan Bushell
Phillip Morris, Inc., it interpreted Engle (and applied traditional conspiracy principles) to hold that any class member can sue Lorillard, Liggett, and Vector Group for their role in the conspiracy to conceal information, even though the class member didn't smoke those companies' cigarettes, and can take advantage of the Engle findings. [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 7:25 am by rbm3
Administrative law -- Canada PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW / BY DAVID PHILLIP JONES AND ANNE S. [read post]
7 Sep 2011, 1:07 pm by rbm3
Administrative law -- Canada PRINCIPLES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW / BY DAVID PHILLIP JONES AND ANNE S. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 3:37 pm by Paul Karlsgodt
  Justice Scalia’s broadly worded opinion does not expressly turn on the consumer-friendly nature of AT&T Mobility’s arbitration clause. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 9:16 am by Hopkins
Sadly for RJ Reynolds, Kool cigarettes, manufactured by Phillip Morris, had been burning them on market share. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 9:16 am by Hopkins
Sadly for RJ Reynolds, Kool cigarettes, manufactured by Phillip Morris, had been burning them on market share. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 2:58 pm by Don T. Hibner, Jr.
Phillip Morris, Inc., 199 F.Supp. 2d 362 (MDNC 2002) (even defendant with market power may engage in promotional advertising and product positioning campaigns through funding of in-store display incentives, where rivals could gain same display space through use of similar competing practices). [read post]