Search for: "Nichols v. Backes"
Results 101 - 120
of 196
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Oct 2014, 2:05 pm
From Morris v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 9:43 pm
In Yanmar America Corporation v. [read post]
27 Aug 2014, 9:45 am
Nichols, 938 F.Supp. 737, 739 (D.Kan.1996) (reducing award by 15% in light of respondent's financial condition and because awarding full fee would unduly limit respondent's ability to support his children); Rydder v. [read post]
2 Aug 2014, 7:10 am
From the largest U.S. refinery in Port Arthur to the storied Permian Basin in West Texas, Big Oil is back. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 4:28 am
Co. v. [read post]
16 Jun 2014, 4:39 pm
McFarlane, 360 F.3d 644, 660 (7th Cir. 2004); see also Nichols v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 8:15 am
Manson, Graham v. [read post]
4 Apr 2014, 1:42 am
ZDNet's Steven Vaughan-Nichols, who likes open source far better than patents, thinks the PAI is, for the time being, "foggy on the details".It's not purely a coincidence that Apple would take a more active role than ever before in patent policy during the opening week of the Apple v. [read post]
31 Jan 2014, 2:56 am
Tugendhat J first referred back to Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 WLR 1232 where Lord Nicholls established that breach of confidence was better encapsulated by another concept, that of misuse of private information, and commented that the tort, however labelled, “affords respect for one aspect of an individual’s privacy”. [read post]
26 Oct 2013, 9:29 am
The attorney representing the Girden family was Benjeman Nichols. [read post]
17 Aug 2013, 3:11 pm
We can find no clearer statement of judicial antipathy to expert witness advocacy than the famous copyright decision by Judge Learned Hand in Nichols v. [read post]
3 Aug 2013, 7:44 am
(1971) and Albemarle Paper Co. v. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
So, we come back to the question of justification. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
Because they have no sharp edges, it is a case in which, in Lord Nicholls’ words, “the position is not so clear”; but not one where Article 14 does not apply at all. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 10:53 am
Because they have no sharp edges, it is a case in which, in Lord Nicholls’ words, “the position is not so clear”; but not one where Article 14 does not apply at all. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 2:54 am
Scholastic Inc. v Harris, 259 F3d 73, 85-86 [2d Cir 2001]; Johnson v Kennedy, 350 Mass 294, 298, 214 NE2d 276, 278 [1966]; Posner v Miller, 356 Mich 6, 9, 96 NW2d 110, 111-112 [1959]; Nicholes v Hunt, 273 Or 255, 261-262, 541 P2d 820, 823-824 [1975]; Willman v Beheler, 499 SW2d 770, 775 [Mo 1973]; Fisher v Fisher, 83 Cal App 2d 357, 360, 188 P2d 802, 804 [1948]). [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 4:30 am
Supreme Court directed the reinstatement of the two individuals with full back pay and benefits. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 11:06 am
Implications for Commercial Anti-Bribery Laws"; Philip Nichols, University of Pennsylvania, "An International Norm for Corporate Criminal Liability for Bribery"; and Karen Halverson Cross (right), John Marshall-Chicago, "Arbitration of Mass Sovereign Debt Claims: Abaclat v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 6:00 am
In Arnstein v. [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 3:43 pm
Nichols: 15 paragraphs, opens with sparse background on parties. [read post]
