Search for: "FOLEY v GENERAL MOTORS" Results 1 - 20 of 62
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Nov 2016, 8:33 am by MBettman
On November 3, 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio handed down a merit decision in Foley v. [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 5:00 am
Foley of the Foley Law Firm in Scranton for providing me with copies of the Fermin, Benedict, and Heisler cases. [read post]
9 May 2010, 9:54 am by Daniel E. Cummins
My partner, Attorney Tim Foley, and I were again successful in securing a summary judgment, this time in favor of State Farm in the somewhat novel Pike County Court of Common Pleas case of Adragna v. [read post]
27 Jun 2007, 9:00 am
Professor Edward Foley (Ohio State University College of Law) recently posted a piece entitled "The Future of Bush v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Cummins is a partner and civil litigator with the Scranton, Pa., law firm of Foley Comerford & Cummins. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Cummins is a partner and civil litigator with the Scranton, Pa., law firm of Foley Comerford & Cummins. [read post]
29 May 2015, 6:15 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Cummins is a partner and civil litigator with the Scranton law firm of Foley Comerford & Cummins. [read post]
6 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
Neither, says the judge in patent and trade mark case Schutz (UK) Ltd v Werit UK; Schutz UK Ltd, Schutz GmbH & Co KgAA v Delta Containers Ltd (PatLit) EWHC: RIM v Visto: Mr Justice Arnold takes charge (PatLit) Banking brand values plummet (IAM)   United States   US General  Judd Gregg to be nominated as Secretary of Commerce (Inventive Step) (IP Watchdog) (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) (Chicago Intellectual… [read post]
   Recently, another district court judge in Delaware ruled that when the bankruptcy judge rejected the reaffirmation agreement that if the creditor repossessed the car when there had been timely payments, that the repossession was unlawful (Ford Motor Credit v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
It has been repeatedly held that the adoption of Rule 411 did not serve to affect the pre-existing and still valid rule of law generally prohibiting the mentioning of insurance in any regard during civil trials, including at motor vehicle accident trials, as in Henery v. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 6:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
It has been repeatedly held that the adoption of Rule 411 did not serve to affect the pre-existing and still valid rule of law generally prohibiting the mentioning of insurance in any regard during civil trials, including at motor vehicle accident trials, as in Henery v. [read post]