Search for: "Ray v. Time, Inc." Results 41 - 60 of 451
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Feb 2021, 11:47 am by admin
In 1986, she was Chief of the X-ray Receiving Center Section, Division of X-Ray Disease Studies, for NIOSH. [read post]
9 Oct 2020, 8:25 am by Jason Rantanen
The answer is that the federal courts over time have misunderstood and misapplied the Supreme Court’s landmark 2006 decision in eBay Inc. v. [read post]
28 Jul 2020, 4:22 am by Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo
In this context, she briefly explained the case MZ Wallace, Inc v Fuller d/n/a The Oliver Thomas & Black Diamond, No. 18-2665 (SDNY, Dec. 2018), in which the plaintiff claimed the defendants infringed its trade dress rights in quilting handbags. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 10:13 am by Schachtman
Furthermore, there is the matter of physicians reading the same X-ray in two, inconsistent ways. [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 1:17 am by Schachtman
Ray Harron, did not have a patient-physician relationship such that a patient injured as a result of the screening could sue him for malpractice.[13] The plaintiff had received a chest X-ray in a mass screening that resulted from a law firm solicitation. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 10:35 am by Schachtman
Some Past Attempts to Remedy the Harm from Dubious Science in Products Cases GAF’s Litigation against the Asbestos Lawsuit Industry On January 10, 2001, G-I Holdings Inc., the successor to GAF Corporation (“GAF”), filed suit against a group of asbestos personal injury lawyers who it alleged had “orchestrated a scheme to inundate the judicial system with hundreds of thousands of asbestos cases without regard to their merit. [read post]