Search for: "The PEOPLE v. Anderson" Results 461 - 480 of 842
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Sep 2014, 8:38 am
 "Disclosing business secrets to share purchasers" is an IP Draughts post by the ever-perceptive Mark Anderson, it being a review of the recent ruling in Richmond Pharmacology Limited v Chester Overseas Limited and others [2014] EWHC 2692 (Ch) noted by the IPKat here. [read post]
8 Aug 2014, 6:11 am by Eric Penzer
  A court should not employ a presumption where to do so would “elevate a legal construct above common sense” (People v Giordano, 87 NY2d 441 [1995]). [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 10:28 am
 Why isn't it okay to fire the class of people who admit to illegality? [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 3:32 pm by Stephen Bilkis
" In the case of Commonwealth v Anderson, 406 Mass 343, 547 NE2d 1134 [1989], the Supreme Court of Massachusetts held that the Commonwealth must carefully comply with written, checkpoint guidelines and that "substantial compliance" is not the standard for a roadblock seizure. [read post]
19 Jun 2014, 6:00 am by Yosie Saint-Cyr
This was the case in Fox Lake Cree Nation v. [read post]
9 Jun 2014, 12:20 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Almost out there for the taking—Anderson v. [read post]
13 May 2014, 12:59 pm by Kevin
Looks like we have a new record for Largest Known Demand: Anton Purisma v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 4:38 am by Amy Howe
California and United States v. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 11:40 am
Deutsch Larrimore Farnish & Anderson, LLP, 876 A.2d 1044 (Pennsylvania Superior Court 2005). [read post]
28 Feb 2014, 11:03 am by John Hopkins
Morgan Stanley (2005WL 679071) case and the missteps of the Zubulake v UBS Warburg [220 F.R.D. 212 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)} case, I am satisfied we have moved well beyond the Micron vs. [read post]
7 Feb 2014, 2:14 pm
But meaningful representation does not require perfection as held in People v Ford and People v Anderson. [read post]