Search for: "Fee v. Brown" Results 1 - 20 of 1,256
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jan 2024, 7:01 am by Legal Profession Prof
The New York Appellate Division for the First Judicial Department rejected an appeal of a fee arbitration award Respondent failed to establish any grounds for vacating the arbitration award (see CPLR 7511[b]; Matter of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v... [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 2:41 pm by Lyle Denniston
The state of California has gained some added time to answer the request that it be required to reimburse the video game industry for more than $1.1 million for legal fees and expenses after the state lost its appeal to the Supreme Court n Brown v. [read post]
17 Mar 2020, 1:32 pm
  All those little brown envelopes and recordkeeping and such. [read post]
15 Feb 2013, 8:55 pm by Patent Docs
Shubha Ghosh of the University of Wisconsin Law School, Patent Docs author Kevin Noonan of McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP, and Andrew Pincus of Mayer Brown LLP will discuss the February 19 oral argument in Bowman v. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 6:42 am by firstamendmentblogger
Scotusblog gathers coverage of video game trade associations’ motion seeking over $1.1 million in legal fees and expenses stemming from their challenge to the now invalidated California law regulating the sale of violent games to minors. [read post]
30 Sep 2010, 3:32 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The rule became effective on March 4, 2002 (see 22 NYCRR 1215.1 [a]; Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels LLP v Zelmanovitch, 11 Misc 3d 1090[A] [2006]), approximately seven weeks before Ganea retained Rubenstein for the guardianship matter underlying this appeal. [read post]
12 May 2016, 7:00 am by Liah Caravalho
Paulette Brown, president of the American Bar Association, discusses the 50th Anniversary of Miranda v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 6:00 am
In In re Late Fee and Over-Limit Fee Litigation, 2007 WL 4106353 (N.D. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
Governor Brown has vetoed legislation intended to address the California Supreme Court's decision in Harris v. [read post]