Search for: "State v. Sales"
Results 1401 - 1420
of 20,854
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jan 2007, 7:07 am
At issue in an appeal by the state of Maine is a state law requiring those who engage in the sale of tobacco products to get a license to operate at retail and to use only delivery services that will provide proof that the products will not go to minors. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 8:38 am
In Abbott Laboratories v. [read post]
4 Nov 2009, 4:12 am
Premium Mortgage Corp. v. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 3:08 pm
Dilworth Co., 322 U.S 327 (1944); General Trading Co. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 9:18 pm
Moriana, plaintiff worked for Viking as a sales representative in Los Angeles. [read post]
22 Jan 2020, 1:01 pm
Walden v. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 3:30 pm
In Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 9:57 am
Relying in part on the only U.S. court of appeals case to address the application of § 215(a)(3) to state law, Sapperstein v. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 3:21 am
The Court considered the sovereignty of Parliament to be critical, and stated the Crown is not entitled to change domestic law through exercise of its prerogative powers. [read post]
27 Nov 2006, 10:58 am
Ban of sale to minors and labeling requirements not narrowly tailored to meet compelling state interest. [read post]
23 Aug 2008, 11:56 am
I've been meaning to look at the case of Paulin v Paulin [2008] EWCA Civ 900 in detail for some while, but other things have got in the way.The Facts: The only "obvious asset" available to satisfy the wife's financial claims was a sum of about £1,088,000, representing the proceeds of sale of a property that had been used briefly as a matrimonial home and then, following the husband's departure, by the wife and children as a home. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
In Dinnen v. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 3:44 am
Over at Volokh Conspiracy, Orin Kerr questions the vitality of Kyllo v. [read post]
Bowman v Monsanto: the US Supreme Court rules on patent exhaustion and replication of patented seeds
14 May 2013, 2:09 pm
The Supreme Court noted that, under the doctrine of patent exhaustion, 'the initial authorised sale of a patented item terminates all patent rights to that item' (Quanta Computer Inc. v LG Electronics Inc.): the rationale behind this rule is that, once a patentee has received his reward through the sale of the patented item, he has no further right to restrain the use or enjoyment of it (United States v Univis Lens Co.). [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 5:17 pm
(Dorris v TXD Services, LP, DArk, 96 EPD ¶44,581) While on active military duty, employee gets word he has been terminated. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 9:37 am
However, Meril provided instructions to its exhibitor, stating that sales of the devices outside of the U.S. could be solicited. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 9:37 am
However, Meril provided instructions to its exhibitor, stating that sales of the devices outside of the U.S. could be solicited. [read post]
9 Apr 2024, 9:37 am
However, Meril provided instructions to its exhibitor, stating that sales of the devices outside of the U.S. could be solicited. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 7:41 am
State v. [read post]
19 May 2007, 4:00 pm
In Budlong v. [read post]
