Search for: "People v Shah" Results 121 - 140 of 161
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Aug 2012, 5:29 am by Rob Robinson
Samsung: Lack of Custodian Follow-Up+Failure to Suspend Auto-Deletion of Email=Adverse Inference - http://bit.ly/MaaYhA (@LegalHoldPro) Who's Tweeting live from the Apple v Samsung trial? [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 8:29 am by familoo
Most people appreciate the enormous strains on the MoJ and court service to save money and that the premises in Wells St must be expensive. [read post]
30 May 2012, 11:06 am by Venkat
Shah Ninth Circuit Upholds Web Host's Liability for Counterfeiting Retailers--Louis Vuitton v. [read post]
2 May 2012, 5:52 am by Rob Robinson
Georgetown Law Rolls Out the ‘Law Firm Pronunciation Guide - bit.ly/KoaqON (Bruce Carton) Global Aerospace Inc. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 1:52 am
It states: “Article 7. (1) All powers in the Republic belong to the people, and their exercise on behalf of the people shall be effected only under, and by the authority of, this Constitution(2) This Constitution is, as the solemn expression of the will of the people, the supreme law of the Republic, and if any other law is inconsistent with this Constitution that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void. [read post]
1 Sep 2011, 12:50 pm by The Legal Blog
Shah, the Supreme Court held that an 'agent' appointed by a party can plead a case before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, even though he may not be an advocate. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 8:25 am by McNabb Associates, P.C.
The controlled substances involved included the Schedule II drug OxyContin, the Schedule III drug Vicodin, the Schedule IV drug Xanax, and the Schedule V drug cough syrup with codeine. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 10:48 am
 but other people's patents? [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 11:19 am by Bankruptcy Legal Group
Sources: Forbes.com, "Judge Rules Against Bank In Mortgage Modification Suit," Shah Gilani, 2/10/2011 Aceves v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 8:55 am by J. Gordon Hylton
  Moreover, as I noted several years ago in an article on the landmark right of publicity case of Uhleander v. [read post]