Search for: "State v. Bird" Results 221 - 240 of 1,272
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Mar 2020, 9:15 am by Eleonora Rosati
On 28 February last, the third fashion law event organized by Fashion Law London took place in Central London.Megan Curzon (Bird & Bird) and Clara Chasles (Freshfields) were in attendance and now report on what happened that day.Here's what Megan and Clara write:Fashion Law London: The Spring/Summer Collection - Event reportOn 28 February 2020, Rosie Burbidge, Giulia Gasparin, and Eleonora Rosati hosted their third Fashion Law London event, entitled "The… [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 1:48 am by Sophie Corke
In line with Lord Justice Jacob’s point in Actavis v Merck, the Court of Appeal stated that – in certain circumstances – there is nothing inventive about routinely-taken steps even if the actual outcome had not been predicted. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 7:00 am by Alex Nealon
Angry Birds Sues Chicken Restaurant Over Trademark Dispute Rovio Entertainment Ltd. v. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 7:00 am by Alex Nealon
Angry Birds Sues Chicken Restaurant Over Trademark Dispute Rovio Entertainment Ltd. v. [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 2:32 pm by Mark Walsh
Bird’s eye view of the courtroom during argument in June Medical Services v. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 4:51 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Plaintiff’s assertion that, had Arenas been better prepared, the jury would have returned a favorable verdict is pure speculation (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 443 [2007]; Bookwood v Alston & Bird, LLC, 146 AD3d 662 [1st Dept 2017]. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 10:02 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Bird is part of a trend of expanding 230 immunities outside recognizable form. [read post]
28 Dec 2019, 3:33 pm by Richard Hunt
The court declined to retain jurisdiction of state law claims and dismissed the case, though without prejudice to a state court filing of the state law claims. [read post]
20 Dec 2019, 8:22 am by Rob Robinson
Furthermore, the referring court has highlighted certain doubts relating, in essence, to the adequacy of the level of protection guaranteed by the United States with regard to the interferences by the United States intelligence authorities with the exercise of the fundamental rights of the individuals whose data are transferred to the United States. [read post]