Search for: "Leighton v. Leighton" Results 81 - 100 of 105
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Mar 2009, 11:32 am
Plaintiffs also argued that the “direct table service” requirement was established by prior case law in Leighton v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 1:25 pm
In this application under the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA) ("FOI Act"), the complainant submitted that the respondent, a local government area body (Shire of Kalamunda), had failed to undertake "all reasonable steps" for e-mails received by two Councillors between 1 January 2007 and 19 October 2007. [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 6:01 pm
But Judge Thomas (joined by district judge Leighton) concurred, arguing that the prior precedent was wrongly decided (albeit binding).You can guess where this is going. [read post]
12 Sep 2008, 2:33 pm
: Nine v IceTV: (International Law Office)   Benelux Some new rules of the Director-General of the Benelux Organisation for Intellectual Property with regard to trade mark filings refused on absolute grounds and withdrawal of oppositions: (Class 46)   Brazil Brazil exports agricultural technology to developing world: (IP tango)   Canada Conservatives website faces claims of copyright infringement: (Michael Geist), Canada’s trade mark opposition practice… [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 9:56 pm
The 9th Circuit handed down a very important decision today in Quon v. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 4:05 pm
The Times (UK) asks today, "Slaughter & May v Clifford Chance:  Who is pursuing the best route? [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 8:49 am
Leighton Sophistication and the Sciences By Jerre B. [read post]
7 Jan 2008, 8:51 pm
 (I didn’t count Judge Ronald Leighton’s recent grant of summary judgment for the defendants in Ormsby v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 6:02 am
Finding a violation of the Free Exercise Clause in a post-Employment Division v. [read post]
28 Feb 2007, 12:52 am
. Click here to go to www.nylj.com APPELLATE DIVISIONSECOND DEPARTMENTTortsLaw Allows Cause of Action for Injuries Infant Plaintiff Suffered While In Utero, Not Viable Outside Womb Leighton, appellants v. [read post]