Search for: "IN THE MATTER OF OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT RULES, 12, Ch.15, App.1"
Results 1 - 5
of 5
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Dec 2021, 5:30 am
An amendment to the “immigration exception” in the Data Protection Act 2018 following a Court of Appeal ruling that it was unlawful has been made, Mishcon de Reya reports. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 5:45 am
(pp. 14-15)4. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 10:36 am
Noder, 337 P.3d 545 (Az. 2014), the Arizona Supreme Court joined this latter group and held as a matter of first impression that the AUTSA does not displace common law remedies for misappropriation of confidential information that does not qualify as a trade secret. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:27 pm
IV, §§ 28-91 to 28-116 (1991); Aspen Municipal Code § 13-98 (1977); Boulder Rev.Code §§ 12-1-1 to 12-1-11 (1987). [read post]
10 Nov 2007, 10:07 pm
QUESTIONS PRESENTEDii LIST OF PARTIESPursuant to Supreme Court Rule 24.1(b), the following list identifies all of the parties before theKentucky Supreme Court. [read post]
