Search for: "Crocker, v. Crocker" Results 101 - 120 of 170
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Jun 2012, 2:43 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Since the terms of the fully integrated retainer agreement were unambiguous, there was no basis to consider parol evidence (see Slotnick, Shapiro & Crocker, LLP v Stiglianese, 92 AD3d 482 [2012]; Moore v Kopel, 237 AD2d 124, 125 [1997]). [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 7:59 am by Raffaela Wakeman
Over at the Washington Post last week, our own John Bellinger III previewed the Supreme Court arguments in Kiobel v. [read post]
14 Feb 2012, 5:40 am by David Post
(David Post) [** from Wallace Stevens, NY Law School Class of '03, The Man With the Blue Guitar -- though the original reads "for a moment final", a nice example of how much meaning can change when substituting the definite for the indefinite article] The folks over at Justia’s Verdict asked me to give them a piece summarizing the whole SOPA debate and for some reflections of a “now that the dust has settled a bit, what was that all about? [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 9:38 am by scanner1
ROBERT WARREN; JOAN CROCKER,  Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 6:07 pm by Derek Bambauer
Technical experts are unanimous on this – see, for example, Sandia National Laboratories, or Steve Crocker / Paul Vixie / Dan Kaminsky et al. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 6:07 pm by Derek Bambauer
Technical experts are unanimous on this - see, for example, Sandia National Laboratories, or Steve Crocker / Paul Vixie / Dan Kaminsky et al. [read post]
10 Oct 2011, 4:16 am by Marie Louise
First Quality Baby Products (Patently-O) Supreme Court denies sham patent reexamination dispute: Lockwood v. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 12:10 pm
To attend, contact Meeting Organisers Tim Crocker or Martin Lawrence. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 7:10 am by Mark S. Humphreys
In 2008, the Texas Supreme Court in the case styled, National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburg, PA. v. [read post]
31 May 2011, 6:10 am by Nabiha Syed
-       At Concurring Opinions, Thomas Crocker considers Justice Alito’s use of the term “privacy” in his opinion for the Court in Kentucky v. [read post]