Search for: "Appeal of Cherry (francis V.)"
Results 1 - 8
of 8
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Mar 2024, 3:35 pm
Unlike Dobbs v. [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 6:05 am
Judge Robreno's Order yesterday — in which Judge Robreno reversed Judge Raslavich's interpretation of when a debtor may deny secured creditors the ability to "credit bid" in a pre-confirmation auction — provided a remarkably thorough description of the plain meaning rule, which I post below in full so all can cherry-pick for their own cases within our great United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 7:20 am
(IPKat) CFI: CTM grant not contrary to Portuguese business name ruling: Alberto Jorge Moreira da Fonseca, Lda v OHIM, General Óptica, SA, intervening (Class 46) CFI confirms refusal of Anheuser-Busch’s BUDWEISER Community trade mark: Anheuser-Busch v OHIM - Budejovicky Budvar (Class 46) (IPKat) (Law360) (Out-Law) ACTA negotiation powers for EU Commission (BLOG@IP::JUR) EU sound recording term extension vote delayed (Excess Copyright) EP divisional applications… [read post]
5 Oct 2011, 1:44 pm
Did the State oppose the out-of-time appeal? [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 8:38 pm
From the UK Human Rights blog – three posts which caught my eye and worth a read: Adam Wagner - Criticisms remain as dust settles on secret trials bill Rachit Buch: UK passes ‘human rights exam’, but with room to improve Assange kills off Pupino, but ambiguity remains – Alex Tinsley Francis Fitzgibbon QC on his Nothing Like The Sun blog considers the matter of COURT DRESS. [read post]
23 Dec 2023, 7:16 pm
In the district court, a careful judge excluded the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, who relied heavily upon animal studies and who cherry picked and distorted the available epidemiology.[9] The Court of Appeals reversed, in an unsigned, non-substantive opinion that interjected an asymmetric standard of review.[10] After granting review, the Supreme Court engaged with the substantive validity issues passed over by the intermediate appellate court. [read post]
3 Oct 2022, 12:04 pm
See Schulz v. [read post]
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
