Search for: "Vessels v. State"
Results 1221 - 1240
of 1,596
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Oct 2015, 9:53 am
The denial of review in United States v. [read post]
16 Mar 2023, 8:31 am
Harbor Breeze Corp. v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 8:04 am
Riva et al. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 4:31 am
The Court held: [T]he plaintiff failed to state a cause of action to recover damages for breach of a joint venture agreement with regard to the OBST, Royce, and Supramax vessels transactions. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 1:49 pm
Co. v. [read post]
10 Dec 2022, 8:46 am
In Quark Fishing Ltd. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2009, 2:57 pm
There are, additionally, other recognised instances of the extra-territorial exercise of jurisdiction by a State such as cases involving the activities of its diplomatic or consular agents abroad and on board craft and vessels registered in, or flying the flag of, that State. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:50 pm
See, e.g., Callejas v. [read post]
4 Nov 2015, 5:59 am
Russo v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 7:30 am
Co. v. [read post]
26 Oct 2009, 2:03 pm
(stating that intentional ratification may be shown by party’s acceptance of benefits under agreement, after becoming fully aware of fraud); Motel Enters., Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 11:43 am
Another case is Ukraine v. [read post]
3 Apr 2025, 7:08 pm
FCC v. [read post]
25 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm
In Caminiti v. [read post]
18 Sep 2017, 2:42 am
KSR v. [read post]
7 Nov 2017, 12:28 pm
United States, 17-8, and a citizen’s group, in Upstate Citizens for Equality v. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 11:25 pm
In its table of cases cited, it lists the landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in Jones v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 12:26 pm
This same position was reiterated in Subash Kumar Mawani v. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 3:00 am
The employment contract contained a forum clause (the Seaman’s country of citizenship, here Nicaragua) and a choice of law clause designating the law of the flag state of the vessel (Bahamian). [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 6:00 am
United States, 342 F.3d 133, 142 (2d Cir.2003). [read post]
