Search for: "Scott v. Golden et al" Results 1 - 20 of 20
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2024, 9:22 am by centerforartlaw
(Accent Delight), an offshore company with Dmitry Rybolovlev as the ultimate beneficial owner, v. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 9:25 am by Don Cruse
But by granting the motion for rehearing, the Court has given itself more time to think about the issues. 3 Improvident grant: Aggie bonfire case Zachry Construction Corp., et al. v. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 10:28 am by WSLL
City of Casper, et al., 2011 WY 35, __ P.3d __ (Wyo. 2011), followed by Madsen v. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 4:56 am
(GRAY on Claims) District Court E D Texas finds Applied Medical Resources liable for infringement of Covidien’s surgical device patent (Patent Docs) District Court E D Texas limits number of patent claims and prior art references asserted in case: SynQor, Inc v Artesyn Technologies, Inc et al (Docket Report) District Court W D Pennsylvania: Non-practising entity entitled to permanent injunction where infringed patent was the subject of prior exclusive license:… [read post]
21 Sep 2023, 7:20 am by Robin E. Kobayashi
In § 6, I discuss an important recent study by Kimberly Rauscher ScD, MA, et al. , entitled “Prevalence of Workplace Violence Against Young Workers in the United States,” published in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine , Volume 66, Issue 6 [pp. 462-471]. [read post]
31 Aug 2018, 1:52 pm by Richard Hunt
Lindsay v. 1777 Westwood Limited Partnership, et al.,2018 WL 4006425 (C.D. [read post]
11 Apr 2012, 1:13 am by Kevin LaCroix
 The original article on which this revised version is based was originally written before the initial decisio in FDIC v Perry was reported (about which decision, refer here). [read post]
Ball et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-119 (Nov. 3, 2017) refused to dismiss claims against two former employees for breach of their restrictive covenants finding the Illinois Supreme Court would most likely reject the arbitrary two year bright-line rule in favor a fact-specific, totality-of-the-circumstances approach to the question of whether there was adequate consideration for the restrictive covenant agreement. [read post]