Search for: "Safeguard Properties, LLC" Results 1 - 20 of 164
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jul 2020, 7:31 am by Rob Robinson
 About Ipro Tech, LLC: Ipro is the global leader in eDiscovery technology used by legal professionals to streamline discovery of electronic data through presentation at trial. [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
1 Jul 2020, 4:05 am
The property owners alleged that the Executive Order violated their rights under the United States Constitution’s Contracts, Takings, Due Process and Petition Clauses.[2] After agreeing to forgo discovery, the parties each moved for summary judgment, and the court ultimately dismissed the case, in its entirety.In rejecting the claim of a physical taking, the District Court noted that the Governor’s Order did not commit or authorize a permanent physical occupation of… [read post]
But for certain workplaces where those standards were obviously not sufficient, companies should not be able to simply say “we did as we were told” in order to avoid compensating those who were unnecessarily harmed.Reprinted with permission from the June 1, 2020, edition of the “New York Law Journal” © 2019 ALM Media Properties, LLC. [read post]
22 May 2020, 4:52 pm by INFORRM
EUIPODecision Date: February 27, 2020 The Fifth Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) set aside the judgment of the General Court which affirmed the European Union Intellectual Property Office’s (EUIPO) refusal to grant a trademark for the German word sign ‘Fack Ju Göhte. [read post]