Search for: "LaBelle v. LaBelle"
Results 1041 - 1060
of 12,213
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2009, 1:14 pm
Here is the abstract: In its 2009 Wyeth v. [read post]
31 Dec 2014, 5:52 am
Werdebaugh v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 2:25 am
Regina v Lee [2010] EWCA Crim 1404; [2010] WLR (D) 160 “The offence under s 85(5)(b) of the Medicines Act 1968 of selling or supplying a medicinal product which was misleadingly labelled or marked in respect of the nature or quality of the product, where such sale or supply was done by a person ‘in the course of a business carried on by him’, could not be committed by a person who was merely employed or engaged by the business which carried out the sale or supply,… [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 11:16 am
See FDA v. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 6:58 pm
Backstrom, and James V. [read post]
18 May 2016, 6:27 am
Apotex Inc. v. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 10:08 am
Brod v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 6:16 am
Today's case is Peart v. [read post]
21 May 2007, 3:16 pm
See Harvey v. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 12:22 pm
Under current law, as confirmed by the United States Supreme Court in the Pliva v. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 2:03 am
Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd [2012] EWHC 296 (Admin); [2012] WLR (D) 37 “In order to found a conviction for an offence under regulation 44(1)(d) of the Food Labelling Regulations 1996, a prosecuting authority was required to prove, to the criminal standard: (i) that the food, at the point that it was ready for delivery to the ultimate consumer or caterer, was ‘highly perishable’ and so required then and thereafter to be labelled… [read post]
16 Jul 2018, 3:53 pm
The Court of Appeal holds that policy objective means that California's statute that requires consumers to be warned about things that may cause cancer (via warning labels) is preempted vis-a-vis breakfast cereals in which such cancer-causing chemicals are created by baking, frying, or roasting such grains.Which is a shorthand way of saying that since telling the people the truth may cause them to react in ways we think are bad for them, we'll make sure they're kept in… [read post]
1 Feb 2008, 6:10 pm
Kordel v. [read post]
22 Aug 2014, 9:22 am
April 24, 2014) (distributor of generic drugs had no power to change labeling unilaterally); Stevens v. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 5:43 am
Something like what we want – a rigorous, disciplined approach to warning adequacy – happened in Becker v. [read post]
15 Oct 2020, 12:22 pm
Kroessler v. [read post]
17 Oct 2024, 6:33 am
Li v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 9:56 am
The November 16th conference in Warner v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 1:21 am
One such case is yesterday's ruling in Case C-93/08 Schenker SIA v Valsts ienemumu dienests, a reference for a preliminary ruling from the AugstÄ [read post]
5 Nov 2008, 2:25 am
., which makes batteries, razors and personal care products, said Friday it was granted a preliminary injunction in a patent infringement case against Spectrum Brands Inc. that will keep some of its competitor's batteries off store shelves.Energizer is alleging Spectrum infringed one of its patents by importing primary lithium batteries made in China and selling them under the Rayovac Lithium label in the U.S.See… [read post]
