Search for: "SHAW v. ILLINOIS" Results 21 - 40 of 95
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
For more information and for a review of the latest changes to state laws, please check out Seyfarth Shaw’s 2019-2020 edition of its 50 State Desktop Reference. [read post]
28 Jun 2019, 4:29 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
As we blogged HERE, this question was answered in the negative by the Illinois Supreme Court in Rosenbach v. [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 9:01 pm by Rodger Citron
In January 2009, Maddin was transporting cargo through Illinois when the brakes on his trailer froze because of subzero temperatures. [read post]
12 Jun 2019, 7:26 am by Kate Shaw
Kate Shaw is a law professor at Cardozo Law School. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 1:00 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
Panel - Policy Surveillance for Public Health Advancement Moderator: Benjamin Meier, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Jamie Chriqui, University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health Steven Hoffman, Osgoode Hall Law School Nadia Sawicki, Loyola University Chicago School of Law B. [read post]
5 Aug 2018, 4:45 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 128577 (ND IN, July 31, 2018), an Indiana federal district court allowed a Jewish inmate to move ahead to seek an injunction requiring that he be provided with kosher meals.In Shaw v. [read post]
23 Apr 2018, 1:36 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  The key debate, centered around the concept of “standing” under Spokeo, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Apr 2017, 5:30 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
***Seyfarth Shaw's Trading Secrets blog has an excellent summary of the trade-secret status afforded customer lists. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 10:00 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
It's a very interesting read, stemming from a case where the underlying claims have nothing to do with trade secrets.Also outside the non-compete context, but certainly relevant to non-compete claims, is the Appellate Court of Illinois decision in Carlson v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 2:22 pm by Robert B. Milligan
While the circuit court split continues to widen regarding the interpretation of unauthorized access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the recent decision in U.S. v. [read post]