Search for: "Burrows v State"
Results 81 - 100
of 200
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Mar 2020, 3:19 am
TheInfluence of Member State Submissions on Copyright Law” (forthcoming Modern LawReview)]This paper presented a really fascinating look at the "explosion" of copyright jurisprudence at the CJEU. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 4:27 am
Furthermore, with respect to the Emerson defendants, it is undisputed that they were not present when the allegedly defamatory statement was made and, significantly, the complaint is bereft of any allegations setting forth a basis to hold them liable for Burrows’s statement (see Bostich v United States Trust Corp., 233 AD2d 193, 194). [read post]
8 May 2019, 10:30 am
Murphy’s article Abandon Chevron and Modernize Stare Decisis for the Administrative State is cited in the following article: Heather Elliott, Gorsuch v. the Administrative State, 70 ALA. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 7:45 am
In Janssen v Teva (2009) the Federal Circuit stated that mere plausibility does not suffice to meet this requirement, if it did then patents could be obtained for little more than “respectable guesses”. [read post]
24 Mar 2019, 5:08 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 17 October 2018 (Underhill V-P, Sharp LJ and Sir Rupert Jackson). [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 4:34 pm
District Court in National Women’s Law Center v. [read post]
12 Nov 2018, 6:38 am
In Enterprise Products Operating, LLC, v. [read post]
12 Nov 2018, 6:38 am
In Enterprise Products Operating, LLC, v. [read post]
12 Nov 2018, 5:38 am
In Enterprise Products Operating, LLC, v. [read post]
26 Oct 2018, 3:47 am
Accordingly, the complaint failed to state a cause of action for violations of Judiciary Law § 487 (see Ehrenkranz v 58 MHR, LLC, 159 AD3d 872, 872; Shaffer v Gilberg, 125 AD3d 632, 636; Schiller v Bender, Burrows & Rosenthal, LLP, 116 AD3d 756, 759). [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 4:30 am
Allegations regarding an act of deceit or intent to deceive must be stated with particularity (see CPLR 3016[b]; Facebook, Inc. v DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 AD3d 610, 615; Armstrong v Blank Rome LLP, 126 AD3d 427; Putnam County Temple & Jewish Ctr., Inc. v Rhinebeck Sav. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 9:48 am
” Compendium (Third) § 101.1(A); Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 9:48 am
” Compendium (Third) § 101.1(A); Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 2:14 pm
THE PROBLEM: Capacity v. [read post]
4 Jan 2018, 4:55 pm
Rule in Clibbery v Allan In a sense, the case of Clibbery v Allan [2002] EWCA Civ 45, [200] Fam 261, [2002] 2 WLR 1511, [2002] 1 FLR 565 confirms my point; and it represents the common – (judge-made) – law, which cannot be overturned by a rule-maker. [read post]
6 Dec 2017, 1:19 pm
105 S.Ct. 2218 85 L.Ed.2d 588 HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS, INC. and the Reader’s Digest Association, Inc., Petitionersv.NATION ENTERPRISES and the Nation Associates, Inc. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 7:54 am
Do you remember Zarda v. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 10:13 am
’ United States v. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 2:21 am
This Kat was so reminded in revisiting the 2013 decision of the United States Supreme Court, Already LLC dba Yums v. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 5:26 am
As explained by the Supreme Court in Campbell v. [read post]
