Search for: "STATE v TOPP"
Results 1 - 20
of 43
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Oct 2011, 8:14 am
The Topps Company (“Topps”) is suing fellow baseball trading card manufacturer Leaf Trading Cards (“Leaf”) for copyright and trademark infringement in a lawsuit recently filed in federal court (The Topps Company, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 6:04 am
An appeal to the Supreme Court was denied (455 U.S. 1019 (1982). ) So with that victory under its belt, Topps sued Fleer in 1982 stating that the latter company had been “unjustly enriched” by its sale of baseball cards in the period between Fleer’s 1980 victory and the 1981 reversal. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 12:45 pm
State v. [read post]
5 Jan 2008, 2:21 pm
Brooks v. [read post]
17 Aug 2021, 11:43 am
The SPAC is looking to amend its charter to issue more shares so it can acquire the baseball card maker Topps. [read post]
21 Oct 2009, 8:12 am
She contacted the owner of the dog (Sandy White) who stated to her that the dog in question had been living at the defendant Topp' property for in excess of two months; and c. [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 9:05 am
Topp, 247 F.3d 1316 (CAFC 2001 ) and Ultradent v Life Like Cosmetics, 127 F.3d 1065 are cited. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 9:51 am
However, Topp’s defence counsel claimed he was unable to pay the fine and produced a letter from Topp’s wife, which stated the family’s financial situation was moderate.There was no explanation regarding the whereabouts of the money and the Crown was unable to locate it. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 2:53 am
The Topps Company, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 9:54 am
Topp Telecom, Inc., 247 F.3d 1316, 1330 (Fed. [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 3:56 am
See Patton v. [read post]
19 Jun 2007, 3:01 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITConstitutional LawCircuit Upholds Congress' Power to Pass Anti-Bootlegging Law Under Commerce Clause United States, appellant v. [read post]
20 May 2008, 1:26 am
DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORKCriminal PracticeGovernment Must Prove Alien's Knowledge That Identity Documents Belonged to AnotherUnited States v. [read post]
24 Oct 2020, 11:34 am
In the case of the Hatice Cengiz v. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 5:00 am
A corporation is domiciled only in the state where it is incorporated (Sease v Central Greyhound Lines, Inc., of New York, 306 NY 284 [1954]). [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 7:02 pm
In Idaho State Bar v. [read post]
1 Jun 2021, 7:42 am
Roberson v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 6:24 am
Take, for example, the recent case of Malcolmson v. [read post]
30 Oct 2009, 5:37 pm
" Topps v. [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 10:12 pm
[16] Galella v. [read post]
