Search for: "In re James S. (1978)"
Results 161 - 169
of 169
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
[i] The Court re-affirmed these principles stating the following: The Copyright Act strikes “a balance between promoting the public interest in the encouragement and dissemination of works of the arts and intellect and obtaining a just reward for the creator… It seeks to ensure that an author will reap the benefits of his efforts, in order to incentivize the creation of new works. [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 8:51 am
He got too close and accidentally cut through the child’s shoe, piercing a toe. [read post]
30 Oct 2022, 10:01 am
He got too close and accidentally cut through the child’s shoe, piercing a toe. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 1:09 pm
Aug. 12, 2021) (quoting In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 (1955)). [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 4:26 pm
In the following guest post, John Reed Stark, President of John Reed Stark Consulting and former Chief of the SEC’s Office of Internet Enforcement, sorts out the issues involved in the battle between Apple and the government, in light of all the circumstances, including the February 29, 2016 opinion by Eastern District of New York Judge James Orenstein in the separate Apple iPhone unlocking case. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:09 am
EEOC, 434 U.S. 412 (1978), the Supreme Court outlined the principles that guide a district court's discretion when it decides whether to grant attorneys' fees to a prevailing defendant in a Title VII case. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:37 pm
(citing In re Appropriation for Hwy. [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm
S. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm
Medeiros, State Solicitor General, Gordon Burns, Deputy State Solicitor General, James M. [read post]
