Search for: "BARTH v. STATE"
Results 21 - 40
of 45
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Dec 2013, 8:07 pm
For example, produce has, since at least 1991, been the source of substantial numbers of outbreak-related E. coli O157:H7 infections.[19] Other unusual vehicles for causing E. coli O157:H7 infections have included apple juice, yogurt, dried salami, and mayonnaise.[20] According to a recent study, an “estimated 73,480 illnesses due to E. coli O157:H7 infections occur each year in the United States, leading to an estimated 2,168 hospitalizations and sixty-one deaths… [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 8:07 am
Alleged violations of a university’s internal administrative policies were not violations of law as required by the Texas Whistleblower Act, nor were a university professor’s reports of them made to an appropriate law enforcement authority, ruled the Texas Supreme Court, finding the lower court lacked subject matter jurisdiction (University of Houston v Barth, June 14, 2013, per curiam). [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 12:28 pm
STEPHEN BARTH, No. 12-0358 Per Curiam In this per curiam opinion, the Court revisits the case THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON v. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 9:40 am
In Cariou v. [read post]
29 Apr 2013, 5:40 am
In Cariou v. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 5:20 pm
In Cariou v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 3:46 pm
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (tobacco, taxation)In re Barth (bankruptcy, per capita payments)Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 4:38 am
Barth v. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 2:08 am
Barths. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 2:08 am
Barths. [read post]
1 Mar 2012, 2:08 am
Barths. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 11:26 am
Barths. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 2:01 am
(Laurence Kaye on Digital Media Law) United States US General Can I object to the production of my client’s source code on the basis of relevance or confidentiality? [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 9:16 pm
.'" Barth v. [read post]
13 Aug 2010, 6:22 pm
” Remedy and Bonding In the Opinion, the ITC “determined to issue a limited exclusion order against the goods of those Respondents found to infringe the Barth I patents” and “decline[d] Rambus’s request to direct the LEO to all products incorporating NVIDIA controllers, [including] even products of non-respondents” under Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 1:49 pm
[pdf]View Electronic Briefs in 08-0799 STATE FARM LLOYDS v. [read post]
11 Jun 2010, 10:47 am
Application of State v. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 2:00 pm
[Barth v. [read post]
3 Mar 2009, 5:16 am
Summary of Decision issued February 23, 2009Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.Case Name: Schmidt v. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 2:16 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) ZH (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 8 (19 January 2009) High Court (Administrative Court) SP v Secretary of State for Justice [2009] EWHC 13 (Admin) (19 January 2009) High Court (Chancery Division) Angel Solicitors (a firm) v Jenkins O’Dowd & Barth (a firm) [2009] EWHC 46 (Ch) (19 [...] [read post]