Search for: "State v. Donaldson"
Results 41 - 60
of 196
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Oct 2010, 5:00 am
In Grayson v. [read post]
3 Apr 2022, 11:07 am
Any enhanced or modified statutory protections which do exist are expressly stated in EA 2010 and are limited to specific circumstances, for example, the discrimination provisions unique to pregnancy and maternity. [read post]
18 Apr 2007, 1:53 pm
Donaldson, 793 F.2d 498, 503 (2d Cir. 1986); United States v. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:17 pm
It has been common, for a number of years, for such BTE cover to also be attached to bus companies' motor insurance.There have now been a number of decisions covering this issue and exploring whether a failure to make appropriate enquiries of the defendant bus company as to whether such cover was available would invalidate the CFA.In Cochrane v Chauffeurs of Birmingham (Central London CC) 22/6/07, Donaldson v Four Square Coach Company (Huddersfield CC) 11/6/07 and… [read post]
2 May 2012, 12:27 am
[Section 149] has a significant role to play” and R(Bapio Action Ltd) v SSHD (2007) EWCA Civ 1139, where it was stated that Due regard must be an essential preliminary to any important policy decision, not a rearguard action following a concluded decision. [read post]
2 Apr 2011, 5:11 am
In T M Noten BV v. [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 12:01 am
Michael Donaldson will moderate the discussion. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 2:21 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Legal Services Commission v Rasool [2008] EWCA Civ 154 (05 March 2008) Revenue & Customs v Dunwood Travel Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 174 (07 March 2008) AIC Ltd v Marine Pilot Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 175 (07 March 2008) Research In Motion UK Ltd v Visto Corporation [2008] EWCA Civ 153 (06 March 2008) City Inn (Jersey) Ltd v Ten Trinity Square Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 156 (06 March 2008) Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Bright,… [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 3:28 pm
Related posts:Federal Circuit on Software Patents: Show Me the AlgorithmsEarlier today the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Noah Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 8:06 am
This week our lawsuit, Donaldson and Guggenheim v. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 4:47 am
See my discussion of last year’s Ohio Supreme Court decision in State v. [read post]
5 Jan 2007, 10:13 am
Donaldson v. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 10:01 pm
Spain kept not only Texas, but western territories that today comprise much of the states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming.... 1774, in London, England, at the conclusion of 2-1/2 weeks of proceedings in the case captioned Donaldson v. [read post]
23 Apr 2007, 7:03 pm
Anyway, I found a bunch of video clips about the Supreme Court's recent Gonzales v Carhart decision. [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 5:49 am
Further case law has also illustrated that the attractiveness of a design, the intentions of the author, the design’s visual effect, symbolism and commercial success in the marketplace will not be factors in a finding of eligibility for copyright protection (Bleistein v Donaldson Lithographing Co).In relation to derivative works, it is stated that the registration of such works would not cover any previously published or registered works (17 U.S.C. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 9:13 am
A national court, other competent authority in an EPC contracting state, or the UPC may request acceleration of appeal proceedings under Article 10(4) RPBA, without providing a specific reason. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 3:30 am
In any event, the coverage denial letter and the plaintiff’s insurance policy did not utterly refute or conclusively establish a defense to the plaintiff’s claims (see Gruber v Donaldsons, Inc., 201 AD3d 887, 889; County of Westchester v Unity Mech. [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 3:41 pm
Tooley v. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 7:26 pm
Donaldson: Judge Thomas Woodall affirmed the trial court's grant of a motion to suppress evidence seized after a traffic violation stop.Word v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 7:24 am
In Case T‑396/11, ultra air v OHIM - Donaldson Filtration Deutschland, the General Court examined the applicability of the concept of 'abuse of rights', in relation to an application for a declaration of invalidity of a Community trade mark, under Articles 56(1)(a), 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation 207/2009. [read post]
