Search for: "State v. Roebuck" Results 81 - 100 of 244
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 May 2007, 6:07 am
Aceros Y Maquilas de Occidente, S.A. de C.V., 28 F.3d 572, 578 (7th Cir. 1994); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 6:50 am by Amy Howe
Glazer and Sears, Roebuck and Co. v. [read post]
11 May 2010, 2:53 pm
State Compensation Insurance Fund (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 911, 951-954 [ordering a remititur of punitive damages to $5 million, for a ratio of 10.3 to 1]; Rosener v. [read post]
28 Jan 2011, 1:13 am by Curt Cutting
Sears, Roebuck & Co.) has nothing to do with punitive damages. [read post]
16 Nov 2012, 1:50 pm by Bexis
Nov. 8, 2012), primarily concerning its fraudulent joinder holding – in accord with the “overwhelming weight of authority” in other states – that a hospital cannot be strictly liable for claimed defects in drugs and medical devices that are used in medical procedures within its walls. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 9:11 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 Jurisdictional Boundaries of Prior Use within Britain: An analysis of the House of Lords’ judgments in Roebuck v Stirling (1774) and Brown v Annandale (1842)Barbara Henry (University of Hertfordshire)Commentator | Eva Hemmungs Wirtén (Linköping University, Sweden) Two cases, 60 years apart. [read post]