Search for: "United States v. Sweet"
Results 181 - 200
of 466
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2014, 10:00 pm
But with the case of the United States v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:12 am
The United States 5th Circuit issued an opinion in 2014 that should be read. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 7:49 am
” The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted summary judgment of non-infringement to Acushnet. [read post]
6 Jun 2014, 7:09 am
United States 13-983Issue: Whether, consistent with the First Amendment and Virginia v. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 2:33 pm
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. [read post]
30 May 2014, 6:36 am
Earlier this week, I blogged about Hall v. [read post]
18 Apr 2014, 5:00 am
Bauman, 134 S.Ct. 746 (2014), and having done so we recommend it to anyone representing overseas clients worried about being swept into the maw of the overlawyered legal climate in the United States. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 3:04 am
A Manhattan appellate panel’s decision last month in Akasa Holdings, LLC v Sweet, 2014 NY Slip Op 01822 [1st Dept Mar. 20, 2014], illustrates another kind of co-op shareholder dispute involving a battle for board control of a four-unit co-op, pitting one tenant-shareholder owning a majority of the voting shares against the other three tenant-shareholders. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 2:18 pm
Defamation in the Internet Age Both the United States[1] and Texas[2] Constitutions broadly guarantee the right of free speech. [read post]
27 Mar 2014, 6:07 am
Illinois 13-5967Issue: Whether a defendant is acquitted for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, where a court grants a motion for directed verdict after the prosecution refuses to present any evidence at trial to the empaneled and sworn jury. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 10:56 am
But how should the Supreme Court of the United States resolve that question? [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 9:01 pm
Co. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2014, 11:19 am
It appears that Merck KGaA (MK) alleged that MSD had infringed its trade mark in the United Kingdom and, while it's not stated explicitly in the note received by this Kat, it looks as though there had been use of the mark but that MSD was arguing that it was a use that was permitted under the terms of the agreement, since MSD was arguing here that the agreement was governed by New Jersey law. [read post]
16 Feb 2014, 9:34 am
. ____ Q: What is the name of the wood pavement patentee in City of Elizabeth v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 2:14 pm
State, A Brief History of the Netherlands p. 37). [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 3:36 pm
” As I explained in an earlier post, Congress intended RFRA to incorporate by reference the Supreme Court’s Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence from the era preceding Employment Division v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm
Tough-But-Nice-Guy, the once-feared federal prosecutor, has been deceived, if not made a fool of, by a youngish, sweet-faced, single mother of four who worked for him. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
24 Dec 2013, 5:45 am
(Designers Guild Ltd. v. [read post]
