Search for: "Sturm v. Boker" Results 1 - 3 of 3
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
First Department Holds That Invoices Standing Alone May Not Be Regarded as Evidence of Title or Ownership of Property.
24 Apr 2017, 5:50 am by Joel R. Brandes
Hence, standing alone, it is never regarded as “evidence of title" (Sturm v. [read post]
New York Divorce and Family Law Blog - http://brandeslaw.blogspot.com/
Christopher et al. v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., dba Glaxosmithkline holds, 5-4, that pharma sales reps are exempt as "outside salespersons"
18 Jun 2012, 5:48 pm by The Complex Litigator
See, e.g., Sturm v. [read post]
the complex litigator - http://thecomplexlitigator.com/post-data/
More on Kirtsaeng v John Wiley & Sons
15 Oct 2012, 9:30 am by Terry Hart
Cir. 1984).See, for example, UMG Recordings v Augusto, 628 F.3d 1175, 1180 (9th Cir. 2011), “not every transfer of possession of a copy transfers title.”Sturm v Boker, 150 US 312, 329-30 (1893).Cunard SS v Mellon, 262 US 100,122 (1923). [read post]
Copyhype - http://www.copyhype.com/