Search for: "Santiago v. State" Results 101 - 120 of 337
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Nov 2013, 4:30 am by Karen Tani
From Chicago to Santiago: The Formation and Impact of the ‘Chicago Boys and Girls’Robert Van Horn, "Corporate Funders, Edward Levi, and the Rise of Chicago Law and Economics in the 1950s"Paul V. [read post]
12 Sep 2019, 1:02 pm
Accordingly, certification is proper.BACKGROUNDPlaintiff alleged that he was the “rightfulowner” to certainwaterfront property in Santiago, Cuba. [read post]
23 Oct 2016, 10:47 am
Moving to trademarks, the blog also covered the INTA announcement about the opening in 2017 of the Latin America representative office in Santiago (Chile).Over at MARQUES Class 46, the blog discusses the judgment in the Gucci v. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 12:30 pm
Ct. 1614, 1618 (2022) (Barrett, J.); United States v. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 4:17 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  In a shocking act of judicial activism, the Connecticut Supreme Court in Santiago v. [read post]
13 Nov 2020, 3:37 pm by
The concept stems from the Supreme Court of the United States’ ruling in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 11:19 am by Jeremy Saland
The follow is the framework and as addressed in Santiago: “Under the foundation test set out in People v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 8:24 pm by Kirk Jenkins
 That’s the issue the Illinois Supreme Court will address tomorrow morning in Santiago v. [read post]
24 May 2016, 7:56 pm
Indeed, the International Working Group of Sovereign Wealth Funds, in the course of developing its “Santiago Principles” explained that as “a result of the SWFs’ increasing level of assets invested in public and private equity holdings, they are exercising greater influence on corporate governance practices” (Santiago Principles, 3 (Santiago Principles: Objective and Purpose); also Kay 2008, 11). [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 1:30 am by Gilles Cuniberti
Celine Camara, Doctoral candidate, Researcher at the Max-Planck Institute, Discrimination against Third State Nationals in Regulation 2201/2003 “Brussels II bis”. [read post]