Search for: "Gray v. Gregory" Results 1 - 20 of 77
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Mar 2015, 7:56 am by Marty Lederman
"  The canon in question was applied by the Chief Justice, on behalf of six Justices, in last year's Bond decision--namely, the “the well-established principle” of Gregory v. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 7:12 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Forlenza of Patterson Belknap is available.Previous IPBiz post on Ropes & Gray case: Plagiarism by patent attorney leads to malpractice claim A piece in jdjournal noted:Ropes & Gray filed a motion to dismiss on Tuesday, citing the fact it is common practice to copy text from other patents. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:19 pm
Commonwealth, 280 Va. 231, 259 (2010)(witness tampering); Gray v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 6:27 am
” This “clear statement rule,” found in cases such as Gregory v. [read post]
12 Sep 2015, 6:43 am by Randall Hodgkinson
Kevin Gray, No. 109,912 (Sedgwick)Motion to correct illegal sentence appealCarl F.A. [read post]
5 Mar 2009, 6:30 am
This is the third in the four-part series from the brain injury case of Gregory Joseph Gagnon, et al. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 4:00 am by Ray Dowd
  Gregory Murphy, who'd written a stage play and a screenplay, claimed that Effie Gray infringed on his works titled The Countess.The reality of the film business is that distributors won't distribute a film when there is a litigation threat pending. [read post]
8 Feb 2019, 6:04 am
Potential Changes to Fund of Funds Arrangements Posted by Thomas Hiller, Brian McCabe, and Edward Baer, Ropes & Gray LLP, on Friday, February 1, 2019 Tags: Exchange-traded funds, Investment advisers, Investment Advisers Act, Investor protection, Risk management, SEC, SEC rulemaking, Section 12(d), Securities regulation The Latest on Proxy Access Posted by Holly J. [read post]
29 May 2022, 1:02 am by Frank Cranmer
A week in which we learned the meaning of “WTF”… … err, “Wine Time Friday”, from the Sue Gray report (at p30). [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 12:57 am by INFORRM
There should be “no unnecessary barriers” to the use of justification (McDonald’s Corp v Steel [1995] 3 All ER 615), and a defendant should be able to enjoy “a full opportunity to make good whatever defence he has” (Basham v Gregory (unreported, 21 February 1996 CA) per Lord Bingham MR). [read post]