Search for: "Doe Defendant 19" Results 81 - 100 of 10,835
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Dec 2016, 8:29 am
 However, unlike the Trade Marks Act 1994, the Regulation does not include a requirement that the applicant must be using or have a bona fide intention to use a trade mark. [read post]
18 May 2007, 8:33 am
This simply does not indicate that this defendant's case could not have been tried prior to July 24, the final trial date for speedy trial purposes. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 4:15 pm by Bianca Saad
Does an employer owe a duty of care to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to an employee’s household members? [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 4:30 am
If a complaint does not specify an amount of damages, the burden falls on the removing defendant to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that CAFA’s amount in controversy requirement is satisfied. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 3:13 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  In that case, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims for compensation for COVID-19 screening time because the plaintiff failed to provide evidence that such time was a principal activity in the defendant’s cereal manufacturing plant. [read post]
14 Dec 2020, 12:02 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Gilat, 2020 WL 1309086, No. 19-CV-2255 (KMK) (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
Second, the SJC’s COVID-19 Order likely does not toll an employee’s 300-day deadline to file a discrimination or retaliation claim under M.G.L. c. 151B with the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (“MCAD”). [read post]
20 May 2022, 10:26 am by Holly Brezee
The clock for defendants seeking removal does not technically begin to tick until service of a summons. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 2:57 am
Even if defendant’s arrest was illegal, the exclusionary rule does not bar testimony of defendant assaulting the officer during the arrest. [read post]
24 Aug 2022, 7:44 am by Alex Phipps
Examining defendant’s appeal, the court explained that an indigent defendant does not have an absolute right to a free transcript. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 12:59 pm by James E. Novak, P.L.L.C.
§ 13-3408 Other Articles of Interest from The Law Office of James Novak’s Award Winning Blog: Court Discusses Accomplice Liability in Recent Arizona Robbery Case, Arizona DUI and Criminal Defense Attorney Blog, July 19, 2018 Arizona Court Determines Defendant Consented to Extended Traffic Stop, Arizona DUI and Criminal Defense Attorney Blog, August 14, 2018 Court Holds Arizona Medical Marijuana Statute Does Not Permit Possession of Hashish, Arizona DUI and… [read post]
22 Jan 2007, 9:10 pm
 filed a trademark infringement suit January 19 against Duvall, Washington-based Moonray Espresso Corp. and Michael Snow, its alleged owner. [read post]
Further, if the case settles prior to such an adjudication, the exclusion does not apply, and the insurer cannot escape its obligation to indemnify the insured(s) for settlement. [read post]