Search for: "Sells v. State" Results 161 - 180 of 15,546
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Feb 2016, 12:24 pm by Lyle Denniston
Talen Energy Marketing and CPV Maryland v. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 6:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
” Facts of South Dakota v Wayfair In 2016, South Dakota enacted a law requiring businesses to collect state sales taxes if they sell more than $100,000 of goods inside the state each year or sold tangible personal property, any product transferred electronically, or services for delivery into South Dakota in 200 or more separate transactions, regardless if they have a physical presence in the state. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 10:46 am
Selling Damages Cars: Consumer Fraud Cases and examples In Grabinski v. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 5:12 am by Jim Singer
Int’l Trade Comm’n), the Federal Circuit ruled that a sale of a patented article outside the United States does not authorize the buyer to import the article back into the United States or sell the article within the United States. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 5:12 am by Jim Singer
Int’l Trade Comm’n), the Federal Circuit ruled that a sale of a patented article outside the United States does not authorize the buyer to import the article back into the United States or sell the article within the United States. [read post]
15 Oct 2013, 8:45 am by CrimProf BlogEditor
United States: (1) Whether a gun buyer’s intent to sell a firearm to another lawful buyer in the future a fact is “material to the lawfulness of the... [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 9:44 am by CivPro Blogger
Harris, holding that the Federal Meat Inspection Act preempts a California state statute that regulated the ability of slaughterhouses to buy, sell, or receive a nonambulatory... [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 7:31 pm
In some instances, you may even face a civil forfeiture - where the state may seize personal assets such as your car - if they believe if was purchased with the proceeds of your pot sales. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 6:39 am by Daniel K. McClendon
  States strongly object to the Quill standard because it cuts into their tax revenue, since they cannot impose sales tax collection obligations on out-of-state online retailers who sell to in-state customers. [read post]
16 Oct 2012, 2:05 pm by kjr32
By Mark Apostolos, Albany Government Law Review[1] Product manufacturers are generally required by state law to sell a product that: (1) is free of design or manufacturing defects, and (2) carries appropriate warnings putting customers on notice as to the … Continue reading → [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 2:34 pm
On December 13, 2010, the Supreme Court announced its decision in Costco v. [read post]
23 Jul 2019, 7:03 am by John Jascob
The panel noted that in Newsome, an Oklahoma state court held "that a sale or offer to sell a security originates from a state if 'any portion of the selling process' has occurred within the state. [read post]
25 Sep 2012, 5:45 am
Before the patent trial between Apple and Samsung began, the district court issued a preliminary injunction against Samsung from making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the United States, or importing into the United States, Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer. [read post]
17 Oct 2012, 5:13 am
Earlier this summer, the district court enjoined Samsung from "making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the United States, or importing into the United States, Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer, and any product that is no more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any design contained in U.S. [read post]
4 Oct 2010, 8:26 pm by Steve Bainbridge
A shareholder’s ability to dispose of his stock is merely defined by the terms of the corporate contract, which in turn is provided by the firm’s organic documents and the state of incorporation’s corporate statute and common law. [read post]
9 Dec 2008, 7:32 pm
Illinois Governor Arrested for Trying to Sell Obama's Senate Seat US V. [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 8:31 am by InvestorLawyers
(“CCPT V” or, the “Company”) – at reported prices of $17.25-$17.75 – suggests that investors who chose to sell their shares on a limited secondary market may have sustained considerable losses of up to 30% (excluding any distributions received to date). [read post]