Search for: "Garner v. Scott*"
Results 101 - 120
of 162
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jun 2014, 1:07 pm
Garner and Scott v. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:00 am
Garner, 2007 BCSC 72 (CanLII), Madam Justice Humphries, in addressing the apparent ambiguity in Beals, observed: [ [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 4:08 am
Whether it’s the time when Turk’s April Fool’s gag of all time pwned the New York Times, or its persistence in spreading the Eric Garner loosies myth, reliability must always be questioned. [read post]
24 May 2010, 9:10 pm
Graham v. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 1:22 pm
Pino v. [read post]
26 Oct 2012, 9:55 am
United States and Alberts v. [read post]
2 Jun 2019, 4:47 am
[iii] The report has garnered remarkably little serious attention. [read post]
28 Jun 2020, 8:14 pm
Press 2008); Charles Lane, The Day Freedom Died: The Colfax Massacre, the Supreme Court, and the Betrayal of Reconstruction (Henry Holt & Company 2008); and United States v. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 12:46 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2018, 5:08 pm
India The Data Security Council of India has made a number of comments focusing on data protection and privacy laws in the country, garnering coverage from the Financial Express. [read post]
30 Jun 2022, 9:24 am
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 4:30 am
Williams, 549 U.S. 346 (2007) and Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 10:29 pm
Gaines [Picked by Brendan V. [read post]
3 Feb 2022, 7:41 am
A year later, the Supreme Court issued its landmark ruling in Obergefell v. [read post]
11 Mar 2019, 10:15 am
GARNER, READING LAW: THE INTERPRETATION OF LEGAL TEXTS 237 (2012). [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 4:00 am
What has garnered the most opposition to my work in this context, is the concept of the “judicial resistance. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 6:30 am
It was not just any marriage suit; it was one of the cases decided in Obergefell v. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 3:57 am
” People v. [read post]
15 Aug 2019, 11:24 pm
Question Raised: Which Way Did the Money Flow? [read post]
21 Oct 2022, 8:30 am
To play Devil's Advocate, one could argue there's not necessarily anything wrong with a seller garnering secondary meaning for a feature (e.g. the Coke bottle shape) by using a design patent, and then using that secondary meaning to protect, specifically, those marketing features that consumers come to see as identifying the seller and distinguishing them from others. [read post]
