Search for: "Heard et al v. Deal et al"
Results 141 - 160
of 285
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Mar 2014, 10:36 am
In recent years that would be a case widely known in the UK as “Abela – v- Hammonds Suddards et al” where I was the coordinator and head of the legal strategy on behalf of my client, A. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 12:51 am
Does this mean that satire is also permitted, because the term “parody” encompasses what Posner et al. would call “weapon parody” (i.e satire)? [read post]
8 Jan 2014, 1:26 pm
Two Apple v. [read post]
6 Jan 2014, 2:13 pm
Corp. et al.,. [read post]
31 Dec 2013, 4:03 pm
Superintendent of Southport Correctional Facility et al., the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the petition dismissed. [read post]
17 Nov 2013, 4:00 am
Federation of Labour, et al. v. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 7:23 am
Mohammed et. al. once more to order. [read post]
15 Sep 2013, 4:00 am
Larry Hrynew, et al. [read post]
3 Aug 2013, 9:00 am
Gates et. al,, a damages action against government officials in their individual capacities, will be heard on on October 22nd; the GTMO hunger forced-feeding appeal will be heard on October 18th. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 12:15 am
The doctrine of inherent anticipation (particularly after Schering Co. v Geneva Pharmaceuticals Inc. et Al., commented here - see also, in the UK, Merrell Dow v H N Norton & Co), may lead to similar distortions. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 5:29 am
Aug. 21, 1998) (citing Daubert II, “‘[d]oubling of the risk’ is the legal standard for evaluating the sufficiency of the plaintiffs’ evidence and for determining which claims should be heard by the jury”), rev’d, 292 F.3d 1124, 1136-37 (9th Cir. 2002) In re Berg Litig., 293 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2002) (companion case to Hanford Nuclear Reservation) Cano v. [read post]
24 May 2013, 5:13 am
Warren Hospital, et al. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 11:38 am
Kind of a big deal. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 2:54 am
Hansmann, et al., The New Business Entities in Evolutionary Perspective [Feb. 2005]). [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 1:10 pm
District Court Judge Richard Lazzara in that case [Myers et al v. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 1:01 pm
I have previously written about how Rogers et al are trying to get a refund of their “ringtone” payments made to SOCAN going back to 2003 in light of the SCC’s July 12, 2012 decision in ESA v. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 10:45 am
Geithner, et al. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:55 am
Further, the United States Supreme Court recently heard arguments in Vance v. [read post]
3 Jan 2013, 2:15 pm
How will the Supreme Court deal with the Cinar v. [read post]
23 Dec 2012, 3:26 pm
Instead, this 40% magnitude of reduction results only in a loss of chance which is not compensable in medical malpractice cases (See: Cottrelle et al v. [read post]
