Search for: "Roland v. United States" Results 21 - 40 of 98
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
[Online] Available at: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/download-file/Guidance_for_exporters_issue_1_2016.pdf (accessed 27 September 2017). [7] Op. cit. [8] The Waverley Criteria were adopted in the United Kingdom in 1952, and were based on recommendations in a report chaired by John Anderson, first Viscount Waverley: Chamberlain, K. and Hausler, K. (2015) United Kingdom. [read post]
[Online] Available at: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/download-file/Guidance_for_exporters_issue_1_2016.pdf (accessed 27 September 2017). [7] Op. cit. [8] The Waverley Criteria were adopted in the United Kingdom in 1952, and were based on recommendations in a report chaired by John Anderson, first Viscount Waverley: Chamberlain, K. and Hausler, K. (2015) United Kingdom. [read post]
[Online] Available at: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/download-file/Guidance_for_exporters_issue_1_2016.pdf (accessed 27 September 2017). [7] Op. cit. [8] The Waverley Criteria were adopted in the United Kingdom in 1952, and were based on recommendations in a report chaired by John Anderson, first Viscount Waverley: Chamberlain, K. and Hausler, K. (2015) United Kingdom. [read post]
[Online] Available at: http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/download-file/Guidance_for_exporters_issue_1_2016.pdf (accessed 27 September 2017). [7] Op. cit. [8] The Waverley Criteria were adopted in the United Kingdom in 1952, and were based on recommendations in a report chaired by John Anderson, first Viscount Waverley: Chamberlain, K. and Hausler, K. (2015) United Kingdom. [read post]
28 Jul 2017, 11:35 pm by Brian Frye
  On December 30, 2015, Graham filed a copyright infringement action against Prince and Gagosian in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that Prince had improperly used his photo without permission. [read post]
8 May 2017, 7:43 am by Jon
 in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States ...Mean the same thing. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 8:56 am by Randal L. Gainer
As Bruce Schneier points out, “attackers can just as easily build a botnet out of IoT devices from Asia as from the United States. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 8:56 am by Randal L. Gainer
As Bruce Schneier points out, “attackers can just as easily build a botnet out of IoT devices from Asia as from the United States. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 12:31 pm by Aimee Hess
Continue reading → The post Important Texas Oil & Gas Case – Roland Oil Co. v. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 12:31 pm by Aimee Hess
Continue reading → The post Important Texas Oil & Gas Case – Roland Oil Co. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2016, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
From SSRN:Holly Fernandez Lynch & Gregory Curfman, Bosses in the Bedroom: Religious Employers and the Future of Employer-Sponsored Health Care, (Law, Religion, and Health in the United States (Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. [read post]
1 Apr 2016, 8:56 am by Eugene Volokh
Roland Van Liew also lives in Chelmsford, and has actively and publicly disagreed with Stansfield on many matters. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 12:35 am by INFORRM
Pant advised the State to stop taking criticism of governance as a personal insult. [read post]
11 Nov 2015, 9:59 am
Marco Sassòli, The Convergence of the International Humanitarian Law of Non-International and International Armed Conflicts – The Dark Side of a Good Idea Urs Saxer, Staaten als Grundeinheiten des internationalen Systems Edzard Schmidt-Jortzig, Politik und Ethik Paul Seger, Let the Sunshine In: Five Small States on a Mission to a More Transparent United Nations Security Council Bruno Simma, »Ja, aber«: Der International Gerichtshof und das zwingende… [read post]
28 Oct 2015, 9:19 pm
Barcelo III, Substantive and Procedural Arbitrability in Ad Hoc Investor-State Arbitration — BG Group v. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 3:35 am
Animal rights organisation People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has taken legal action in the United States on the monkey’s behalf (apparently named Naruto), claiming that the animal owns the copyright in the successful photographs and should therefore reap the benefits financially. [read post]