Search for: "We Don't Judge - We Defend"
Results 1941 - 1960
of 6,915
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Oct 2015, 11:56 am
But reality doesn't dependon whether you believe itReaders may remember the initial litigation, noted by this Kat back in March 2014 in "Coming off the fence: IPEC knows a threat when it sees one", in which the Brundle defendants established that Perry had made an unwarranted threat to commence patent infringement -- and that Perry's counterclaim for patent infringement was a non-starter. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 10:00 am
I don't think three months is that unusual, though I agree they probably should have pushed it a little quicker. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 4:15 am
We don't need anymore unethical lawyers. [read post]
24 Feb 2009, 10:25 am
And judges often don't foresee the unintended consequences of what they've done.Take, for example, In re OxyContin II, No. 700000/07, 2009 N.Y. [read post]
18 Aug 2018, 9:57 am
If at first you don't succeed, file, file again. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 6:29 am
I can't tell where he hid them. [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 12:49 pm
Don't obstruct me. [read post]
1 Oct 2021, 1:47 am
Small app developers don't implement SEPs. [read post]
31 Jan 2016, 7:36 am
(But of course we don't really know what income this "really" is, given that the fungibility of money makes it quite meaningless where the particular loan proceeds were directly sent.) [read post]
20 Aug 2008, 10:18 am
You don't have the element of intentionality you had when a purveyor of obscene materials knew what was being loaded on trucks and where the trucks were going (Tulsa, San Francisco, Milwaukee, etc.). [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 2:12 pm
You know, I can be pretty hard of appellate decisions I don't agree with. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 8:04 pm
The Defendant's Co-Conspirators 8. [read post]
23 May 2011, 11:02 am
"[T]otally inconsequential" defects in removal papers don't deprive federal courts of jurisdiction. [read post]
6 May 2021, 11:25 am
This means that in practice, we users don’t even get that minimal protection. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 9:14 pm
But the two sides don't agree on much. [read post]
11 May 2009, 11:05 pm
We know that people lie, cheat and steal, but we know that isn't limited to the defendants. [read post]
25 Dec 2006, 4:50 pm
" On that last one, an acquittal is justice, you in the media just don't get the post-sentencing jailhouse interview.9. [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 7:32 am
After all, to the victim, such actions are not only life-threatening—they're life-altering, even if they don't eventually result in violence. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 4:16 am
The case also highlights that technology has allowed all of us to develop new (more extended, not necessarily deeper) relationships with people that we don't really consider part of our "in person" social circle.The case also points out that jurors need to "go off the grid" during trial and deliberation process.To get the full context of what occurred I recommend reading the full decision. [read post]
22 Oct 2011, 12:18 am
Epps' piece, especially his conclusion (we're sorry, eminent domain abuse, as bad as it is, is not quite as bad as concluding that a class of people are simply incapable of being citizens because they are somehow lesser humans -- that's just repugnant), we don't buy in wholly to his reasoning. [read post]
