Search for: "Matter of Gallo v Gallo"
Results 1 - 20
of 92
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Mar 2011, 11:35 am
Matter of Gallo v Gallo 2011 NY Slip Op 01275 Decided on February 15, 2011 Appellate Division, Second Department The family court modified the custody and visitation orders of the Supreme Court in the parties’ divorce to prohibit husband from driving with the parties’ children in an automobile. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 3:44 am
Complying with all statutory tests critical to sustaining an administrative decisionGallo v Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37 AD3d 984Albert P. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 3:27 am
Last Friday, the High Court granted special leave to appeal in 2 trade mark matters: Health World Ltd v Shin-Sun Australia Pty Ltd E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited Given only about 80 cases a year score this level of achievement, there are obviously big issues afoot. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 10:23 am
A more recent Ninth Circuit decision in E & J Gallo Winery v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 11:13 pm
If that were all, it would have been an end to the matter. [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 9:04 am
So Judge Holly Thomas drops the following footnote:"Jiaxing did not enter an appearance in this matter and therefore has not provided briefing in opposition to San Antonio’s position. [read post]
23 Jun 2018, 7:30 am
The latter then told Huawei: you can't keep two courts busy in parallel with the same matter, so please wait for your California-based judge, then we'll see.A few days ago, Judge Orrick denied Huawei's motion for reconsideration (this post continues below the document): 18-06-19 Huawei v. [read post]
30 Jan 2015, 3:19 am
In the Matter of Sacher v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 8:09 am
In Matter of Monroe Beach Inc. v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 8:09 am
In Matter of Monroe Beach Inc. v. [read post]
20 May 2010, 6:37 pm
But it was successful on appeal to the Full Court (E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited [2009] FCAFC 27).By cross-claim in the Federal Court, Lion Nathan applied to have the registered trade mark removed from the register on the grounds of non-use from 7 May 2004 to 8 May 2007.The Full Court upheld the primary judge's finding that Lion Nathan's non-use application was made out and that Gallo's trademark should be removed from the… [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 1:43 am
In Ericsson v. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 1:00 am
The defendants made a prima facie showing that the wheel stop over which the plaintiff tripped, which was painted yellow in contrast to the color of the sidewalk to which it was affixed, was not an inherently dangerous condition, and was readily observable to those employing the reasonable use of their senses and, thus, open and obvious.Case: Gallo v. [read post]
12 May 2014, 9:08 am
Laura Ortuondo, 33, formerly of San Diego, California, pleaded guilty before Magistrate Judge William V. [read post]
11 May 2018, 9:32 pm
Motorola opinion that the Gallo test for antisuit injunctions matters in this specific context, while Huawei says Samsung has to satisfy both the Supreme Court's Winter preliminary-injunction factors and the Gallo test for antisuit injunctions. [read post]
4 Nov 2012, 9:01 pm
So was the holding of the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, in its September 28, 2012 decision in Pelcher v Czebatol. [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 11:43 am
” Gallo v. [read post]
17 Jun 2016, 5:48 am
Judge Gallo issued a Rule 1925(a) opinion on April 27, 2015. [read post]
4 Nov 2009, 3:33 am
Upon dissolution, the corporation's legal existence terminates (see Lorisa Capital Corp. v Gallo, 119 AD2d 99, 109). [read post]
26 May 2011, 2:49 am
The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact to rebut the defendant's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Lorisa Capital Corp. v Gallo, 119 AD2d 99, 110). [read post]
