Search for: "Stone v. Stone" Results 101 - 120 of 3,741
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2012, 11:02 am
In a case that's likely to have implications on future Boston business litigation, search engine giant Google is facing down the language-learning pros at Rosetta Stone. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 10:00 pm by arester
Geoffrey Stone is Harry Kalven, Jr., Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School. [read post]
24 Oct 2013, 8:30 pm by Mary Dwyer
Young 13-95 Issue: (1) Whether the state forfeits an argument that Stone v. [read post]
5 May 2007, 2:14 pm by Denese Dominguez
Maddox argued that, because Wald was deposed well in advance of trial, Stone was not deprived of the ability to prepare a proper defense.The governing principle is that the appropriate sanction for a discovery or scheduling order violation is largely discretionary with the trial court. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 12:12 pm by Marty Schwimmer
I showed restraint and didn't make a '99 problems' reference in the headline. [read post]
1 Mar 2022, 12:02 am
Ltd and others v G4K Fashion Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 3439 (Ch) (20 Dec2021)In Original Beauty Technology and others v G4K Fashion Ltd and others [2021] EWHC 294 (Ch) (24 Feb 2021), Mr David Stone, sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court, held that the defendants had infringed some of the first claimant's [read post]
12 Apr 2017, 2:35 pm by Eugene Volokh
Recall that a jury had found Rolling Stone liable for $1 million and writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely liable for $2 million, based on what it concluded were false statements about University of Virginia Associate Dean Nicole Eramo in its “Rape on Campus” article; that award was being appealed, but the appeal has now been settled (as to both defendants). [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 3:01 am by Emma Cross
Jetivia SA & Anor v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors  [2015] UKSC 23 Part 2 The proper analysis of Stone & Rolls The Justices were required to consider whether the decision in Stone & Rolls [2009] UKHL 39 applied to the facts of Bilta. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 12:48 am by John Diekman
Moreover, the small stone on which plaintiff allegedly fell was an unavoidable and inherent result of the work being performed at the site.Case: Ghany v. [read post]
21 Apr 2016, 8:30 am by Howard Wasserman
Because it was so late in the Term, Stone's death affected only five cases decided after April 22 (Stone became ill and died immediately after reading his dissent in Girouard v. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 3:04 am by sally
“Piercing the corporate veil is currently a hot topic with a difference of opinion between various judges on several of the finer points, especially in a contractual context (compare Burton J in Gramsci v Stepanovs [2011] EWCH 333 Comm with Arnold J in VTB v Nutritek [2011] EWCH 3107 CH). [read post]