Search for: "Martin v. Ross" Results 81 - 100 of 128
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2012, 2:45 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
"InLopresti v Bamundo, Zwal & Schermerhorn, LLP; 2010 NY Slip Op 33436(U);  Sup Ct, NY County ; Docket Number: 100206/09; Judge Martin Shulman determines that equitable estoppel does not apply. [read post]
21 Nov 2011, 1:50 pm by Geoffrey Rapp
Couvillion, Note, Defending for its life: ChampionsWorld LLC v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 7:55 am by emagraken
I agree with the observations of Burnyeat J. in Martin v Lavigne and Neufeld (Costs), 2010 BCSC 1610 at para. [read post]
23 May 2011, 5:00 am by Kevin
From a complaint filed last week in San Francisco:  Michael M ____ v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 6:19 am by David Oscar Markus
(Jack); Tucker IV, John A.; Vetter, John C.; Kilman, Jonathan P.; Fowler, Kevin; Hyde, Kevin E.; Reck, Kevin A.; Ross, Kevin K.; Wolfson, Mark J.; Traber, Martin A.; Smith, Leslie; Breuer, Matthew G.; Annis, Michael D.; Gay, Michael; Kirwan, Michael B.; Matthews, Michael P.; Okaty, Michael; Strickland, Wes; Shivers, Olin G.; Rosenthal, Paul; Wolfe, Randolph J.; Davis, Richard; Bernstein, Robert S.; Hosay, Robert H.; Meek, E. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 2:00 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
"In Lopresti v Bamundo, Zwal & Schermerhorn, LLP;  2010 NY Slip Op 33436(U);  December 14, 2010;  Sup Ct, NY County ;  Docket Number: 100206/09;  Judge: Martin Shulman determines that equitable estoppel does not apply. [read post]
28 Sep 2010, 2:08 pm by David Lat
Richland had some Biglaw help: also involved in preparing the cert petition were Bruce Ross and Vivian Thoreen of Holland & Knight. [read post]
26 Jul 2010, 9:08 am by Steven M. Taber
– Trading Markets.com, July 21, 2010 Consistent with Section 122 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that on July 16, 2010, the United States lodged a Consent Decree with 163 defendants (each of which is identified in the proposed Decree) in United States of America v. [read post]