Search for: "SUPPLEMENT TO OPINION 13"
Results 121 - 140
of 976
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2007, 12:12 pm
Hearing at Ozark on Nov. 13, 2006. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 3:20 pm
City of Dublin, et al. (2013 1st Dist., Div. 3) _____ Cal.App.4th _____, 2013 WL 1235649, filed 3/7/13, ordered pub’d 3/28/13. [read post]
13 Jun 2010, 4:29 pm
Here are the issues in the six cases in which CAAF heard oral argument this term but hasn’t yet issued an opinion: 1. [read post]
10 Jan 2010, 10:22 pm
Fla. 11/13/2009). [read post]
13 Apr 2022, 4:00 am
The NC Court of Appeals, in a published opinion (i.e., the opinion is binding precedent), got egg on its face in the case of Bryan v. [read post]
9 Aug 2013, 1:24 pm
Ct. 710 (2013), See WIMS 1/8/13]. [read post]
14 Jan 2021, 5:45 am
" In re Apple Inc., Serial No. 86857587 (January 13, 2020) [not precedential] (Opinion by Mark Lebow). [read post]
14 Jan 2021, 6:11 pm
However, as it results from point 3 of the Opinion, the future judgment of the Court will supplement its case-law pertaining to the aforementioned Section 3, complementing in particular the judgment in Hofsoe. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 3:55 pm
Supreme Court, opinion & dissent, 6/25/13 Ledbetter v. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 9:05 am
” Id. at 12-13 (internal quotation marks omitted). [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 10:09 pm
The 9th Circuit then remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 10:01 pm
P. 13 (authorizing sanctions when a pleading is groundless or not brought in good faith); Tex. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 2:51 pm
” The Court said that “[p]roponents of the narrower interpretation suggest that Congress’s intent in passing the CFAA was to address computer hacking activities and not to supplement state misappropriation of trade secrets laws. [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 4:52 pm
Cerminara) (2017 supplement). [read post]
20 Apr 2010, 8:21 pm
Crennan J delivered a concurring opinion. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 2:40 pm
Id. at **13-14. [read post]
26 Aug 2011, 8:14 pm
Thomson asserted that this supplementation was untimely and thus, the supplemental prior art contentions and expert opinions related to those contentions should be stricken. [read post]
27 Mar 2012, 2:24 pm
Nonetheless, the opinion is worth reading. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 1:18 am
Denkowski's expert opinions were found relevant, reliable and credible. [read post]
22 May 2023, 10:58 am
In an opinion filed April 18, and belatedly ordered published on May 10, 2023, the Sixth District Court of Appeal upheld the City of San Jose’s (City) certification of a final Supplemental EIR (FSEIR) for development of three high-rise office towers (the “Project”) on an eight-acre downtown site containing several historic structures which the Project required to be demolished. [read post]
