Search for: "Knudsen Law" Results 181 - 200 of 205
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2011, 5:00 pm
Posted by Philip Miles, an attorney with McQuaide Blasko in State College, Pennsylvania in the firm's civil litigation and labor and employment law practice groups. [read post]
3 Dec 2009, 4:30 am
 (Editors' Note:  See the CAFA Law Blog analysis of Knudsen II posted on January 30, 2006 and the analysis of Marshall posted on July 3, 2009). [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 8:35 am
• Additionally, Florida law prohibits anyone below the age of 18 to ride in the bed of a pickup truck. [read post]
17 Jul 2009, 7:25 am
Under federal patent law, anyone who either makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention in the United States or actively induces another to do so is liable for patent infringement. [read post]
12 Jul 2009, 1:17 pm
 The Dorsey & Whitney crew included partner Melissa Krasnow, left in red -- who with colleague Nick Ackerman, was the star of our May Law Technology Now podcast. [read post]
19 Aug 2008, 10:49 am
Summary of Decision issued August 19, 2008 Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court. [read post]
2 Jul 2008, 4:34 pm
Thanks to the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law's Larry Garvin for sharing with us details and commentary on Knudsen v. [read post]
4 Dec 2007, 9:20 am
The emergence of the first publicly traded law firm in Australia. [read post]
8 Nov 2007, 4:24 am
 (Editors’ Note: See the CAFA Law Blog analysis of Knudsen posted on January 30, 2006 and for you folks that are truly interested in the issue, see analysis of Knudsen I posted on September 3, 2005). [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 1:36 am
See Safeco, slip op. at 19 ("It is [a] high risk of harm, objectively assessed, that is the essence of recklessness at common law. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 5:09 am
 (Editors' Note: see the CAFA Law Blog analysis of Knudsen posted on January 30, 2006).Strictly applying California law, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the amended cross-complaint relates back to the original. [read post]