Search for: "State v. Arthur"
Results 1701 - 1720
of 1,905
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Oct 2008, 1:59 pm
In the case Reilly v. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 10:14 pm
Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal.4th 937, 81 Cal.Rptr.3d 282, 293, 189 P.3d 285, 295 (2008). [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 5:01 am
Since the 1970's when the Supreme Court of the United States decided that lawyers could advertise (Bates v. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 7:39 pm
Arthur Andersen LLP, 189 P.3d. 285, 288 (2008), the Ninth Circuit stated (arguably in dicta) that noncompetition agreements in California are invalid unless necessary to protect an employer’s trade secrets. [read post]
1 Oct 2008, 1:04 pm
Norris v. [read post]
30 Sep 2008, 5:43 pm
Arthur M. [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 3:00 pm
Attorney for State: Arthur Thaddeus Perry, Indianapolis, IN. 9:45 AM - Filter Specialists, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 6:07 pm
(University of Chicago)Kondo Jiro (Northwestern University)Korteweg Arthur (Stanford University)Kortum Samuel (University of Chicago)Krueger Dirk (University of Pennsylvania)Ledesma Patricia (Northwestern University)Lee Lung-fei (Ohio State University)Leeper Eric M. [read post]
24 Sep 2008, 7:06 pm
Arthur Anderson. [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 4:00 pm
Bogue In County of Humboldt v. [read post]
3 Sep 2008, 9:46 am
In a long-awaited ruling, the Court in Edwards v. [read post]
28 Aug 2008, 2:15 pm
Mitchell, No. 02-3505 Denial of a petition for habeas relief in a death penalty case is reversed where: 1) a state court applied the Strickland standard in an objectively unreasonable manner for purposes of claims that petitioner's counsel were ineffective in preparing for the sentencing phase of his trial; 2) the state court unreasonably determined that the alleged errors of trial counsel did not prejudice petitioner's case; and 3) a state court erroneously… [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 12:20 pm
See In re Enron, at *2 and Newby v. [read post]
20 Aug 2008, 10:39 pm
Raymond Edwards was hired by Arthur Andersen as a tax manager in January 1997. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 8:00 pm
In Raymond Edwards, II v. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
15 Aug 2008, 10:42 pm
Arthur Andersen that the state legislature effectively restricted the ability of employers to prevent employees from working for competitors. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 8:21 am
See McDonald v. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 7:20 am
Arthur Andersen, S147190, the unanimous court held that a state statute with roots in 19th century laws gives California workers great freedom to switch jobs, to compete against old employers and to solicit former clients. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 10:01 pm
Arthur Anderson. [read post]
