Search for: "State v. Riccio" Results 1 - 20 of 24
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Oct 2011, 7:59 am by Susan Brenner
Plaintiff United States asserts that the exclusionary rule should not be applied to the evidence obtained from the federal search warrant based upon Herring v. [read post]
13 Jul 2015, 7:26 pm
Here are links to the articles in the July issue: Building Workflows for the Intelligent Organization By Jean O’Grady, Director of Research Services, DLA Piper, Washington, DCDeveloping the Right Skill Set for Legal Information Professionals of the Future: The State of Library School Education,  By Holly Riccio, Director of Library Innovation and Library Manager, O’Melveny & Myers, LLP, San Francisco, CAResearch Strategies: Training Attorneys to be Cost… [read post]
2 Jan 2022, 8:17 am by Giorgio Luceri
., colour marks and 3D marks) (MHCS v EUIPO | Case T-274/20 and Guerlain v EUIPO | Case T-488/20), the risks of using a mark in a manner other than that registered (Fashioneast Sàrl v EUIPO | Case T-297/20) and taking unfair advantage of the reputation of a well-known mark (Asolo Ltd. v EUIPO | Case T-509/19) and the importance of presenting valid arguments for the existence of a link between the marks - even in the case of marks with an exceptional… [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 6:45 pm
Consequently, it is incumbent upon the moving party to make a prima facie showing that he is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law (CPLR 3212 [b];Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980];Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067 [1979]);Zarr v Riccio, 180 AD2d 734, 735 [2d Dept 1992]). [read post]
24 May 2007, 10:40 am
"Well, state court judges are savvy and powerful people. [read post]
16 Sep 2017, 6:55 am by Stephen Bilkis
Consequently, it is incumbent upon the moving party to make a prima facie showing that he is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law (CPLR 3212 [b]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]; Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067 [1979]); Zarr v Riccio, 180 AD2d 734, 735 [2d Dept 1992]). [read post]