Search for: "Doe v. Phillips" Results 1061 - 1080 of 1,846
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Oct 2007, 2:41 pm
  This latest features Cate Blanchett at the moment of threats to her by the Catholic Monarchy of Phillip II. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 4:40 am by cdw
California law does not provide the condemned a choice between a three-drug protocol or a one-drug option. [read post]
3 Oct 2011, 4:42 pm by Adrian Lurssen
- Thomas HeintzmanWhat To Expect At Your Marriage Based Immigration Interview - Xiaojuan HuangMartin Kessman v. [read post]
29 May 2007, 3:42 am
All opinions are precedential unless otherwise indicated.Byrne v. [read post]
2 Aug 2011, 9:25 am by Dennis Crouch
Cir. 1997) (Claims should be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification); Phillips v. [read post]
29 Jul 2008, 4:35 pm
* Phillip Johnson, 7 New Square, has penned "Dedicating Copyright to the Public Domain" which is, unsurprisingly, about whether it is possible to dedicate copyright to the public domain (some organisations like Creative Commons provide the facility to do just this). [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 11:01 am
The holdings in Phillips v Joseph Kantor & Co. and Glick and Dolleck, Inc. v Tri- Pac Export Corp. established that summary judgment cannot be granted unless it clearly appears that no material issues of fact exist. [read post]
30 Mar 2013, 3:50 am
Third, interpretation, albeit necessarily textual, does not necessarily coincide with the literal dictionary definition. [read post]
8 May 2015, 8:15 am by Don Cruse
PHILLIPS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A PHILLIPS OIL INTERESTS, LLC, EURENERGY RESOURCES CORPORATION, SYNTEK WEST, INC., CABELTEL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, NATRON INVESTMENTS, A&B CAPITAL CORPORATION, SOUTHMARK CORPORATION, BASIC CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC v. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 6:48 pm
See, e.g., Phillips v. [read post]
24 Aug 2013, 7:24 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1316 (citing SciMed Life Sys., Inc. v. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:23 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
” A trial court’s grant of a CPLR 4401 motion for judgment as a matter of law is appropriate where the trial court finds that, upon the evidence presented, there is no rational process by which the fact trier could base a finding in favor of the nonmoving party'” (Geeta Temple-Ashram v Satyanandji, 142 AD3d 1132, 1134, quoting Szczerbiak v Pilat, 90 NY2d 553, 556; accord Clarke v Phillips, 112 AD3d 872, 874). [read post]
30 Jul 2007, 2:18 am
Click here to go to www.nylj.com Phillips, plaintiff-appellant v. [read post]