Search for: "State v. Arnold"
Results 1021 - 1040
of 1,392
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Dec 2007, 5:35 am
Case Name: In the Interest of MN, S(e)N, S(h)N: LM v. [read post]
14 Feb 2023, 12:33 pm
Arnold, 107 N.C. 861, 11 S.E. 990, 990 (1890); cf. [read post]
17 Feb 2012, 4:18 pm
Jordan v. [read post]
13 Apr 2012, 3:30 pm
Arista v. [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 6:45 am
ARNOLD, III, CFLS (State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization) [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 6:41 am
Yesterday I attended and reported in detail on the Munich I Regional Court's preliminary-injunction hearing in Nokia v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 3:25 pm
Last Friday, in Société Des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 16 (Ch), in what for him is quite a short judgment, Mr Justice Arnold gave the plot away in the very first of his 77 paragraphs:"In what circumstances can a trader secure a perpetual monopoly in the shape of a product by registering it as a trade mark? [read post]
29 Jul 2021, 11:40 pm
Even in the US, where courts have exercised discretion over patent injunctions since the Supreme Court's 2006 decision in eBay v. [read post]
25 Mar 2012, 3:18 pm
Donohoo v. [read post]
24 Jul 2008, 10:00 pm
Arnold & Porter, 756 A.2d 427, 435 (D.C. 2000).Private industry standardization codes - Mutual Casualty Co. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 2:37 pm
(United States v. [read post]
13 Jan 2025, 9:30 pm
These included two that reached the Supreme Court: Powell v. [read post]
22 Sep 2022, 9:43 am
Co. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2014, 6:54 am
Arnold, Pender & Coward, P.C., Suffolk, Virginia, and Brandee L. [read post]
23 Jul 2020, 12:42 pm
Beyer was recently mentioned in Hunter, Jr. v. [read post]
21 Jan 2021, 12:54 pm
[Disclosure: My law firm, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, is among the counsel to the respondent in the Baltimore case. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 2:54 am
Dalsouple Société Saumuroise Du Caoutchouc v Dalsouple Direct Ltd & Another [2014] EWHC 3963 (Ch) is a 1 December ruling of Mr Justice Arnold in the Chancery Division of the High Court, England and Wales, in which some of the best legal brains in that jurisdiction had to give some cogent thought to the meaning of the common-or-garden word "consents". [read post]
15 Aug 2014, 7:16 am
In this Kat's opinion, furthermore copyright does not only vest in those extracts that include the copyright-protected works mentioned by the CJEU, including the Premier League and Barclays logos, as Arnold J clarified in FAPL v BSkyB and Others (see paras 8 ff; this action originated as an application for a blocking injunction as per section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA)).There is also copyright in those broadcast extracts which… [read post]
6 Aug 2011, 11:53 am
United States v. [read post]
