Search for: "Stone v. Superior Court" Results 81 - 100 of 144
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jun 2010, 12:06 pm by Eric
May 11, 2010): “The Court is convinced that plaintiff sought to use its superior position vis-a-vis the trademark to, cause harm to a competitor. [read post]
21 Oct 2010, 4:50 am by Dianne Saxe
The Edwards sued Rebound in Small Claims Court for the $8300, and added thousands of tonnes of clean stone on top of the slag. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 9:32 am by Eugene Volokh
"[3] (You can't get blood from a stone, but maybe from the stone's friends.) [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 5:45 am by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
        Argued October 12, 1993 -- Decided May 26, 1994On certification to the Superior Court, Law Division, Middlesex County.Simon Louis Rosenbach, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant (Robert W. [read post]
19 May 2014, 5:57 am by Matt Bouchard
That’s the unmistakable message driven home by the April 28, 2014 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ published decision in Freeman v. [read post]
31 Oct 2015, 2:39 pm by David Cheifetz
Very simply, Masters in Chambers of a superior trial court occupy the bottom rung of the superior courts judicial ladder. [53] I do not overrule decisions of a judge of this court. [read post]
28 Jun 2009, 9:52 pm
Louis Cardinals (a Major League Baseball team) manager Tony La Russa filed the first claim brought against Twitter in the Superior Court of California. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:06 pm by Bexis
  We already did that in connection with the original decision in Conte v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 7:00 am by Max Factor
Superior Court (2004) 33 Cal.4th 407, 415-416 (2004), citing Foxgate v. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 1:36 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
They may be used against you in court to deny your claim. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 1:37 pm by Schachtman
Bottom line: these verdicts are unsafe. [1]  The cases were tried in a questionable consolidation in the New Jersey Superior Court, for Middlesex County, before Judge Viscomi. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:58 am by Susan Brenner
J.P., 2011 WL 2367979 (New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division 2011), and this is how it began: [J.P.] and his wife N.P. were estranged. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 11:51 am by Arthur F. Coon
Superior Court (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 1, 13 [CEQA petitioners, as the parties “with the most to gain from any underinclusion,” bear “the burden of showing prejudice from any overinclusion of materials into the administrative record”]; Stockton Citizens For Sensible Planning v. [read post]
31 May 2023, 6:42 am by Dan Bressler
” “‘The courts universally hold that a law firm will not be allowed to drop a client in order to resolve a direct conflict of interest, thereby turning a present client into a former client,’ MTTP argued, citing multiple court decisions such as Picker Int’l, Inc. v. [read post]