Search for: "Arnold v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,387
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2024, 2:04 pm
As the Supreme Court memorably put it in the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. [read post]
31 Jan 2024, 6:22 am
Sweet Home Chapter of Communities, the Court distinguished its previous decision in United States v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 5:01 am
United States v. [read post]
23 Dec 2023, 7:16 pm
Not only was the statement wrong in 1993, when the Supreme Court decided the famous Daubert case, it was wrong 20 years later, in 2013, when the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Diclegis, a combination of doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride, the essential ingredients in Bendectin, for sale in the United States, for pregnant women experiencing nausea and vomiting.[16] The return of Bendectin to the market, although under a different name,… [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 5:08 am
(That action, Peter Arnold et al. v 4-6 Bleecker Street LLC et al., has the NYSCEF Index no. 158541/2013.) [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 12:44 pm
I would add that the same is true of the relevance of the creative process, especially if this was intended as an intention to create something 'artistic': the author’s state of mind, intention, sanity or lack thereof count and should count 0. [read post]
30 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
That was a threshold condition, and not question of discretion, R (Omar) -v- Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] QB 112 [30]. [read post]
24 Nov 2023, 7:38 am
In this post, Pippa Borton, Associate at CMS, previews the decision awaited from the Supreme Court in Kireeva v Bedzhamov. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 6:24 am
In Arnold v. [read post]
19 Nov 2023, 2:31 pm
Science Policy (1990); Arnold S. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 2:42 pm
The class spent the entire semester on United States v. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 9:32 am
“We almost wear [scandal] as a badge of honor,” Arnold said. [read post]
1 Nov 2023, 8:02 am
Indeed, easyGroup lost a trade mark dispute against EasyRoommate where Arnold J (as he then was) found that the trade mark was descriptive and therefore invalid. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 9:05 pm
In a recent report, Viral V. [read post]
1 Oct 2023, 10:16 am
Reading Borough Council v Holland (2023) EWHC 1902 (Ch) An appeal of a possession order made at first instance for Ms Holland’s introductory tenancy of sheltered accommodation. [read post]
22 Sep 2023, 11:06 am
Arnold v. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
In 1972, the per se flood crested in U.S. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2023, 2:04 am
The Court, however, applying the principles of construction established in Arnold v Britton, Wood v Capita and Rainy Sky, found that on a correct construction, the 1997 licence only licensed Ford’s US federal trade marks, and not any others. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 8:53 am
Arnold v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 5:01 am
Arnold, not People v. [read post]
