Search for: "Cooper v. State" Results 1461 - 1480 of 7,441
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Apr 2018, 1:20 am by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 4:00 am by INFORRM
The decision in Von Hannover v Germany (No. 2) is the second of two given on 7 February 2012 by the Grand Chamber concerning the balancing of privacy and freedom of expression. [read post]
8 Aug 2021, 11:55 am by Nedim Malovic
Bad faith pursuant to Article 59(1)(b) of the EU Trade Mark Regulation (EUTMR), presupposes the presence of a dishonest state of mind or intention (Koton Mağazacilik Tekstil Sanayi ve Ticaret v EUIPO (C‑104/18 P)). [read post]
12 Aug 2024, 7:00 am by Elies van Sliedregt
Editor’s note: This is part of Just Security’s Symposium on the ICC OTP’s Policy on Complementarity and Cooperation. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 6:15 am
1st_Circuit_seal.png In a pyramid scheme case, the First Circuit affirms the limitation of defense cross-examination of a prosecution witness about the nature of the charges against the witness currently pending in state court; trial judge properly allowed defense to raise only the probative aspect of the extrinsic evidence (about the possible motivation of the witness to ingratiate himself with the government by cooperating in the pyramid scheme prosecution),… [read post]
25 Apr 2013, 8:55 am by WSLL
Range Telephone Cooperative, Inc. [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 7:05 am
AUTO - UM - TIMELY APPLICATION TO STAY OF ARBITRATION - CHOICE OF LAW - FRAMED ISSUE HEARINGMatter of Government Employees Insurance Co. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 2:51 pm
”Contrary to the content and tone of Nunez’s letter, the probation report states Nunez lied when first contacted by police, was “never cooperative,” and after his arrest and release sent a text message to a codefendant stating, 'Gangster rap made us do it lol.'"Dude. [read post]
8 Sep 2007, 12:36 pm
The statute can survive strict scrutiny only if it is "narrowly tailored to promote a compelling government interest," United States v. [read post]