Search for: "Daniel v. Phillips et al" Results 1 - 20 of 30
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Nov 2018, 5:02 pm by Daily Record Staff
Civil litigation — Discovery failure — Attorney’s fees In this case, the Circuit Court for Talbot County granted appellee Mark Wester’s motion to compel discovery, and entered judgment in the amount of $980.50 in favor of his attorneys, appellees Daniel Cox and the Cox Law Center, LLC (“Cox”), and against Jessica Wester’s attorneys, appellants Richard ... [read post]
19 Jan 2008, 11:58 am
Aukerman, et al    Eastern District of Michigan at DetroitDAMON J. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 1:04 pm by Elim
LAW LIBRARY level 3: KD4902 .D48 2013Harry Woolf et al., De Smith’s Judicial Review, 7th ed. [read post]
28 Nov 2010, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
YouTube et. al (2010) CV-10-410890 (Ont. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 2:32 pm
” [29] In essence, not only represented traditional committees would be subject to the disclosure rules, but also ad hoc committees. [30] V. [read post]
23 May 2011, 2:20 am by Kelly
Advising inventors, their spouses, and their start-up companies: James Joyce v Armstrong Teasdale (Patently-O) District Court N D California: Use of patent reexamination evidence in parallel litigation: Volterra Semiconductor Corporation v Primarion Inc (Patents Post-Grant) District Court E D California: Government’s approval of false marking settlement precludes later challenge that settlement was “staged” and therefore lacks preclusive effect: Champion… [read post]