Search for: "State v. Lovell"
Results 101 - 120
of 222
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Apr 2008, 3:28 pm
Lovells LLP’s class action practice has published its latest bulletin (April 2008). [read post]
12 Jul 2016, 10:40 am
That month, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) invalidated Safe Harbor as a data transfer mechanism in the case Schrems v. [read post]
6 Feb 2012, 3:00 am
Lacher Lovell-Taylor 256 AD2d 147(lst Dep l998)). [read post]
19 Aug 2015, 8:00 am
” Dissecting oral argument: Filing Hamdan v. [read post]
21 Aug 2020, 7:55 pm
” Lovell Farms, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Oct 2020, 7:28 am
Electric Light Co v. [read post]
20 May 2010, 12:44 pm
Lovell v. [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 3:29 pm
* Those new European patent litigation rules: a report on the Oral Hearing on the 17th draft Dr Stephan Dorn (Hogan Lovells Int. [read post]
18 Oct 2016, 6:37 am
Two recent English cases, Karen Millen v Karen Millen Fashions Ltd and Skyscape Cloud Services Ltd v Sky Plc, indirectly consider Declarations of Non-Infringement in relation to Trade Marks. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 8:40 am
California,283 U.S. 359, 369-370; Lovell v. [read post]
13 May 2022, 4:00 am
National/Federal A 49-Year Crusade: Inside the movement to overturn Roe v. [read post]
25 Jun 2022, 10:00 am
” Lovell Farms, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2024, 1:52 pm
” Lovell Farms, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 1:01 pm
Varsity Brands to patent review in Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
23 Dec 2020, 8:01 am
Hogan Lovells US LLP (D.C. 2020) 18-SP-218. [read post]
23 Nov 2015, 12:25 am
Data Protection and Data Privacy Eduardo Ustaran, partner at Hogan Lovells, considers the implications of the CJEU’s recent decision in the Schrems case and outlines a plan for companies previously reliant on Safe Harbor for EU to US transfers. [read post]
17 May 2013, 12:59 am
The latest Nokia v. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 12:35 pm
Rodriguez v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 8:48 am
The Court is likely holding Lovell v. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 5:45 am
Observing that a car wash company and its owner “wholly ignore that the ADA prohibits discrimination against those regarded (or perceived) as being disabled,” a federal district court in Tennessee found that the owner’s letter to an employee, in which he stated that the employee was being terminated for medical reasons and that his medical needs could not be accommodated, was direct evidence of disability discrimination (Lovell v Champion Car Wash, LLC,… [read post]
