Search for: "Matter of Norris"
Results 161 - 180
of 386
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2015, 10:42 am
A week of celebration and fun turned into tragedy in a matter of just a few hours. [read post]
24 May 2015, 4:08 pm
The injunction had a short return date before Norris J and it is not clear what happened then – no further judgment having been published.. [read post]
14 May 2015, 7:28 am
” Since Bexis’ 1998 law review article popularized the now-overwhelmingly adopted position that informed consent includes medical risks, not regulatory matters such as off-label use, we are particularly interested in patrolling that boundary. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 5:50 pm
Geetter and Julia Jacobson of McDermott Will & Emery on the firm’s blog, Of Digital Interest Top Ten Reasons Why US Trademark Searches are Important to Every Business – Washington, DC lawyer Susan Neuberger Weller of Mintz Levin on the firm’s blog, Copyright & Trademark Matters The Blurry Line Between Marketing and Business Development (And Does The Label Really Matter)? [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 1:38 am
Norris J granted that application (on the papers) on 14 October 2013); 3. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 2:31 am
The respondent successfully obtained an “unless order” from Norris J that unless the appellant complied with the disclosure order the judgment would be entered against him. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 5:12 am
In refusing to grant the injunction, the Court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 deprives federal courts of jurisdiction to issue restraining orders or injunctions in cases involving or growing out of labor disputes, except where the strike violates an express or implied promise not to strike, and where the underlying issue is arbitrable. [read post]
31 Oct 2014, 5:12 am
In refusing to grant the injunction, the Court held that the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 deprives federal courts of jurisdiction to issue restraining orders or injunctions in cases involving or growing out of labor disputes, except where the strike violates an express or implied promise not to strike, and where the underlying issue is arbitrable. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 6:51 am
Norris-LaGuardia Act. [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 12:49 pm
It remains a matter of great happiness to the IPKat and Merpel that these posts have been so well received. [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 2:09 am
It's an ex tempore 24 July decision of Mr Justice Norris in the Patents Court, England and Wales, which this Kat found on the Lawtel subscription-only service. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 10:04 am
Thus, the court concluded that where, as here, an employment agreement compels the waiver of representative claims under the PAGA, it is contrary to public policy and unenforceable as a matter of state law. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 10:03 am
Norris-LaGuardia states that, as a matter of public policy, employees “shall be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of . . . representatives [of their own choosing] or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 2:56 pm
Not strictly speaking a housing case, though it is a mortgage repossession matter. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 7:20 am
David spent the last nine years as partner in charge of Kirwin Norris’ Fort Lauderdale office, practicing construction law. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:35 am
" Taken together with the rest of 5-100, it is not improper for instance to make a report about the opposition's illegal conduct to the appropriate government agency, but it is improper to communicate the reporting beforehand as a means of gaining leverage and concession to an issue in the civil matter (which, of course, includes family law cases). [read post]
12 Jun 2014, 6:04 pm
Ponzi, 258 U.S. at 260 (“The chief rule which preserves our two systems of courts from actual conflict of jurisdiction is that the court which first takes the subject matter of the litigation into its control, whether this be person or property, must be permitted to exhaust its remedy, to attain which it assumed control, before the other court shall attempt to take it for its purpose. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 11:53 am
This is an internal matter but one of my most important accomplishments. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 11:53 am
This is an internal matter but one of my most important accomplishments. [read post]
