Search for: "Miller, in Re" Results 1401 - 1420 of 4,271
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 May 2017, 8:48 am by Dan Ernst
We earlier noted the  timely and important reargument and panel discussion, sponsored by the Historical Society of the DC Circuit, "In re Judith Miller: National Security Privilege. [read post]
7 May 2017, 11:09 am by Bruce Clark
  We proudly represented the family of Donald Rockwell, who died after consuming hepatitis A tainted food and Richard Miller, wo required a liver transplant after eating food at a Chi-Chi’s restaurant. [read post]
5 May 2017, 9:30 pm by Karen Tani
And while you're at it, consider making a donation to the Peggy Pascoe Memorial Fund. [read post]
2 May 2017, 8:35 pm by Drew Falkenstein
  We proudly represented the family of Donald Rockwell, who died after consuming hepatitis A tainted food and Richard Miller, wo required a liver transplant after eating food at a Chi-Chi’s restaurant. [read post]
1 May 2017, 3:41 am by Ron Coleman
(In re Carson, supra, 197 U.S.P.Q. 554; In re Lee Trevino Enterprises, Inc., supra, 182 U.S.P.Q. 253.) [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 12:14 pm by Kathleen Krafft Miller
Kathleen Krafft Miller is an attorney at Russell, Krafft & Gruber, LLP, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. [read post]
24 Apr 2017, 2:32 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  (While the opinion notes the trial court rejected Respondents’ and Real Parties’ “various procedural defenses” – which were not specified in the opinion, but which in fact included statute of limitations, mootness, and res judicata/collateral estoppel – the Court of Appeal expressly declined to reach these issues, stating in a footnote:  “We need not address the Ohlsons’ various procedural defenses because we affirm the trial… [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
This was on the basis that the government was not a (interested) party to the proceedings and that, by reaching such a finding, the Court would make it difficult for the government to “re-open” this question and/or to challenge the reasoning in MGN v UK in a future case in Strasbourg [29]. (2a) Application of the rule in MGN v UK: Miller and Flood Proceeding on the basis that it would normally breach a publisher’s article 10 rights to require it to reimburse any… [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 8:50 am by Matt Miller, Registered Patent Attorney
The post What is Bitcoin – Part 2 – Practical Benefits appeared first on New Orleans Patent Lawyer Matt Miller. [read post]
19 Apr 2017, 8:08 am by AIDAN WILLS, MATRIX
This was on the basis that the government was not a (interested) party to the proceedings and that, by reaching such a finding, the Court would make it difficult for the government to “re-open” this question and/or to challenge the reasoning in MGN v UK in a future case in Strasbourg [29]. (2a) Application of the rule in MGN v UK: Miller and Flood Proceeding on the basis that it would normally breach a publisher’s art 10 rights to require it to reimburse any… [read post]
18 Apr 2017, 4:34 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
., In re Vaeck, 947 F.2d 488, 495-96 (Fed. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
The Supreme Court’s decision was based on A1P1 because “no argument based on article 6 or article 8 was raised at all on behalf of Mr Miller (or Mr Flood)”. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 9:55 am by J. Dana Stuster
“I won’t say those who fell are Christian or Muslim...I will say that they’re Egyptian,” he said in a speech. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 7:29 am by Nora Ellingsen, Lisa Daniels
In other words, the very dataset we’re consulting is the one most apt to support the administration’s position. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Times Newspaper Ltd v Flood; Miller v Associated Newspapers Ltd; Frost & Ors v MGN Ltd, heard 24-26 January 2017. [read post]
7 Apr 2017, 1:29 pm by Kathleen Krafft Miller
Kathleen Krafft Miller is an attorney at Russell, Krafft & Gruber, LLP, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. [read post]
28 Mar 2017, 11:09 pm by Jarod Bona
The federal district court judge, after allowing plaintiffs a couple opportunities to re-plead following dismissals without prejudice, finally dismissed the case with prejudice. [read post]