Search for: "Sweat v. Does"
Results 101 - 120
of 313
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2016, 10:30 am
Also, consider Brownmark v. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 12:44 am
Nagy v. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 12:37 pm
In Butt v. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 4:35 am
Thus, according to the 6th Circuit in Tilley v. [read post]
24 May 2016, 1:18 am
Similarly, this does not extend to mere facts.Bill just never knew when to stop asking questionsJustice Boswell saw that "Mrs. [read post]
13 May 2016, 5:05 am
” The biggest problem for the Oracle v. [read post]
30 Apr 2016, 7:37 am
TripAdvisor and Yelp v. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 12:33 am
Scene V. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 5:34 am
” That does not mean that mere “sweat of the brow” is enough to claim protection of a compilation by copyright, as explained by the Supreme Court in Feist Publications, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2016, 3:01 pm
A search of reported family judgments for the term polygraph brought up only one hit : F v Y (ABDUCTION: ACQUIESCENCE) [2014] 2 FLR 875 (HHJ Horowitz QC sitting as a HCJ), a case in which there is a single reference to a polygraph test taken by a Russian father, apparently in another jurisdiction, but it does not appear the test was adduced in evidence. [read post]
5 Mar 2016, 5:45 am
But whether a particular work is transformative does not depend on the amount of sweat of the brow, and a derivative work can be created by a mere stroke of the pen, such as Marcel Duchamp’s L.H.O.O.Q. [read post]
20 Feb 2016, 9:38 am
Atlas Brewing Company, LLC v. [read post]
7 Feb 2016, 9:45 am
In Muhammad v. [read post]
31 Jan 2016, 7:00 am
Olivas, (9th Cir., Jan. 27, 2016), the 9th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a complaint by a Native American inmate that for five months he was deprived of deer antlers used for sweat lodge ceremonies.In Terry v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 2:15 am
In Commonwealth v. [read post]
19 Jan 2016, 8:00 am
…this DOES NOT deter us from what we are doing! [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 5:00 am
Press v. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 3:06 am
In support of his showing that the purpose of the LLC, to own and lease the gas station, no longer can be achieved, Zafar alleged, apparently without contradiction by Ahmed, that due to Ahmed’s actions the LLC (i) holds no lease in its own name, (ii) collects no rents, (iii) has no bank account, (iv) files no tax returns, and (v) does no business. [read post]
26 Nov 2015, 10:02 pm
Coetzee is in the US, where he notes Bridgeman v. [read post]
20 Nov 2015, 2:53 am
The reference was received at the CJEU on 7 July 2014, so this ruling is quite a speedy one -- the sign of a case that the CJEU can handle with the need to break into a judicial sweat. [read post]
