Search for: "VERMONT v. NEW YORK"
Results 281 - 300
of 755
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jul 2018, 8:07 am
CCPA’s sales restrictions raise First Amendment concerns In Sorrell v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 1:17 pm
EPA also filed a petition, as did a coalition of 15 states and cities (North Carolina, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Baltimore, Bridgeport, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C.). [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 1:17 pm
EPA also filed a petition, as did a coalition of 15 states and cities (North Carolina, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Baltimore, Bridgeport, Chicago, New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C.). [read post]
16 Jan 2019, 9:33 am
As those who have confronted these lawsuits may know, the current state of the law has led to businesses being subject to duplicative actions in different jurisdictions, primarily, New York, California, and Florida. [read post]
26 May 2014, 9:01 pm
(The path to marriage equality in New York is explained here.) [read post]
24 Apr 2008, 10:59 am
Accordingly, unless the case is brought in the 2nd Circuit (with jurisdiction over New York, Connecticut and Vermont) where such a claim is not likely to succeed, the use of another’s trademark(s) in metatags and keywords is most likely a “use in commerce” and the only question left to decide is whether there is a likelihood of confusion. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 10:36 am
V. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 9:03 am
Jones in Middletown, New York. [read post]
17 Feb 2014, 5:14 pm
On the eve of Lawrence v. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 3:11 am
Currently, fourteen states plus the District of Columbia have adopted RULLCA including California, Florida, and two of New York’s neighbors — New Jersey and Vermont. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 3:11 am
Currently, fourteen states plus the District of Columbia have adopted RULLCA including California, Florida, and two of New York’s neighbors — New Jersey and Vermont. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 3:11 am
Currently, fourteen states plus the District of Columbia have adopted RULLCA including California, Florida, and two of New York’s neighbors — New Jersey and Vermont. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 6:54 am
See New York et al. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 11:38 am
Despite numbering less than four percent of the population, in some five years they have used the political process to change marriage laws in Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 9:52 am
The number of class actions filed against beverage companies in New York increased while the number of cases filed in California decreased. [read post]
12 Jan 2021, 9:52 am
The number of class actions filed against beverage companies in New York increased while the number of cases filed in California decreased. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 4:23 am
This case is limited to the 2nd Circuit (which covers Connecticut, New York, and Vermont), but does point out that other courts that have examined this issue have similarly found the FMLA to impose individual liability. [read post]
15 Mar 2008, 7:42 pm
In Martinez, a New York State appellate court in Rochester recognized a Canadian same-sex marriage as legally valid in the state. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 2:17 pm
Impact of This Decision As a result of this decision, it is now easier for employees within the Second Circuit (specifically, in New York, Connecticut and Vermont) to prevail on claims alleging FMLA violations by their employers if they can demonstrate that their exercise of their FMLA rights was only one reason why their employers took the adverse employment actions against them. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 2:17 pm
Impact of This Decision As a result of this decision, it is now easier for employees within the Second Circuit (specifically, in New York, Connecticut and Vermont) to prevail on claims alleging FMLA violations by their employers if they can demonstrate that their exercise of their FMLA rights was only one reason why their employers took the adverse employment actions against them. [read post]
