Search for: "Maine v. Taylor"
Results 141 - 160
of 296
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Dec 2014, 10:00 pm
They cited Taylor v. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 4:12 pm
These were questions in Lawal & Anor v Circle 33 Housing Trust [2014] EWCA Civ 1514. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 7:25 am
* Oracle v Google: are certain elements of the Java platform entitled to copyright protection? [read post]
8 Dec 2014, 3:56 pm
Sierra Club v. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 4:23 pm
Click here to find outLantana the movie hereLatest Australian jurisprudence on the same issue in Research Affiliates LLC v Commissioner of Patents [2014] FCAFC 150, noted on Patentology here. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 12:37 am
The speakers This year we have a fantastic line up of speakers: David Smith, a partner in Anthony Gold solicitors, talking about section 21 (he was one of the solicitors in the Spencer v. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
By our count, federal judges have trampled over state sovereignty with respect to the heeding presumption in no fewer than eleven states – Alaska, Colorado (despite contrary state-court authority), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New York (despite contrary state-court authority), South Dakota, and Wyoming.Finally, because various states have taken quite different approaches to whether a heeding presumption exists at all and if so how it is applied, careful… [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 4:00 am
Taylor, infra, at para. 34 The most-consulted French-language decision was Sorel-Tracy (Ville de) c. [read post]
20 Oct 2014, 6:03 am
* A clear vision of genuine use: Specsavers v Asda (again) The Court of Appeal for England and Wales has just issued its decision in Specsavers v Asda, a very well-known saga the previous episodes of which have been severally covered by the IPKat [on initial skirmishes, here and here; on the High Court judgment of Mann J here; on the main decision and referral to Europe by the Court of Appeal here; on the costs ruling here and then the… [read post]
5 Oct 2014, 9:17 pm
The circuit court found that the Taylors' main assets were the pipe plug patents, which were marital property subject to equitable distribution. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 10:43 pm
” Prosecutor v. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 7:28 am
The airship also has a track support mounted lengthways along the underside of the main body, which allows the airship's gondola to slide forwards or backwards [read post]
17 Aug 2014, 4:58 pm
Supreme Court held in a 1976 case, Castaneda v. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 9:11 am
In Denmark v. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 9:11 am
In Denmark v. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 3:28 am
KG v OHIM, Wedl & Hofmann GmbH. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 5:07 am
Taylor The Court in Travis v. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 6:00 am
’ Coolidge v. [read post]
29 May 2014, 12:29 pm
Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 501 (1947). [read post]
17 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
[2] See: Christine Taylor, (technology industry consultant) “A call to vendors to make e-discovery affordable for ‘The Other 85 Percent’”; online: http://www.aceds.org/a-call-to-vendors-to-make-ediscovery-affordable/. [read post]
