Search for: "P B" Results 1 - 20 of 14,073
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Dec 2011, 12:58 pm by Sheppard Mullin
Chierichella   CAS 402 has long provided that B&P costs incurred pursuant to a specific requirement of an existing contract may be distinguished from B&P generally and treated as direct costs of the requiring contract.  [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 2:38 am by sally
Regina v B (F); Same v P (A); Same v C (J) [2010] EWCA Crim 1857; [2010] WLR (D) 21 “A judge sitting in the Crown Court had no power to quash an indictment simply because he did not believe that the proceedings were appropriately brought or were not in the public interest when compared with his assessment of the needs of other cases and that had not changed as a result of the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2010.” [read post]
16 Jun 2011, 5:49 am by Sheppard Mullin
Chierichella B&P is a precious resource, a pool of investment dollars.  [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 7:48 am
The case of B v B [2012] EWHC 1924 (Fam), decided today, contains another judicial warning upon the preparation of court bundles. [read post]
7 Oct 2014, 3:01 am by sally
E v B (Case C-436/13) ECLI:EU:C:2014:2246; [2014] WLR (D) 405 ‘Jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility which had been prorogued, under article 12(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility (OJ 2003 L338, p 1), in favour of a court of a member state before which proceedings had been brought by mutual… [read post]
28 Dec 2018, 6:00 am by Brian Silber
R&B singer Marcus Ramone Cooper, aka Pleasure P, was arrested on December 28 for allegedly driving at a high rate of speed while under the influence of alcohol. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 6:00 am by Catherine.Kiernan
P. 26(b)(2)(B), included a determination that plaintiffs had not established good cause for production, and ended with another seven factor test which [...] [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 6:09 am by Wes Anderson
So long as there is the possibility consumers might perceive some affiliation with P&G, or even dilution of the ORAL B or GLIDE trademarks, then these sorts of products can nonetheless fall within the purview of trademark infringement. [read post]
7 Sep 2009, 2:30 pm
Perlman (Suffolk University Law School) has posted The Silliest Rule of Professional Conduct: Model Rule 5.2(b) (The Professional Lawyer, Volume 19, No. 3, p. 14, 2009) on SSRN. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 5:37 am by Ed Felten
For example, suppose we are given two N-digit numbers, A and B, and a 2N-digit number C, and we're asked whether A times B equals C. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 11:02 am
We reached out to our regular Guru of P&C, Bill M, who told us that:"The use of your home for commercial purposes is typically excluded. [read post]