Search for: "Watson v. State of Oregon"
Results 1 - 19
of 19
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2022, 8:36 am
In Watson v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
(C.D.Cal. 2008) 2008 WL 4690536 Watson-Smith v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 6:30 am
Watson, 353 Or. 768, 769, 305 P.3d 94 (Oregon Supreme Court 2013). [read post]
6 Mar 2018, 5:04 am
The case against Dick's Sporting Goods -- which raises the claim discussed here last week -- is Watson v. [read post]
2 May 2011, 2:49 pm
Professor Rebecca Tsosie Part 2: The Doctrine of Discovery in the United States, New Zealand, and Beyond View presentation here Johnson v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 5:33 am
Supreme Court’s 2008 opinion in Kennedy v. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 4:31 pm
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. [read post]
7 Sep 2007, 5:10 am
The game of course was closer than the score indicates and Oregon State had more yardage than the Bearcats did. [read post]
18 Oct 2014, 6:54 am
Matteoni, Matteoni O’Laughlin & Hechtman, San Jose, California, Edward V. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 10:16 am
Again, this opinion is valid only for the State of Massachusetts and not Utah. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:45 am
See NCAA v. [read post]
22 Apr 2021, 5:55 am
Excise taxes on rental cars are levied at the state-level in 44 states. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 2:00 am
A court in Illinois has ruled that the US-based technology blog, TechnoBuffalo, does not qualifiy for state shield law and must disclose its source’s identity. “The decision against the consumer electronics blog TechnoBuffalo comes just one month after a federal district court in Oregon made a similar ruling regarding a Montana blogger, finding that she did not qualify as a journalist under Oregon’s reporter’s shield law” reports RCFP. [read post]
28 Apr 2008, 11:00 am
: (Patent Docs), US: Supreme Court declines to hear final Nucleonics’ appeal in gene-silencing patent dispute with Benitec Australia: (IP Law360), (Therapeutics Daily), US: 505(b)(2) drug approvals rock - Interaction of patents and exclusivity of drugs approved by FDA under section 505(b)(2): (Patent Baristas), US: StemCells’ patents survive reexam – StemCells and Neuralstem differ on extent of changes: (Patent Docs), US: StemCells announces issuance of… [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 1:00 pm
Matteoni, Matteoni O’Laughlin & Hechtman, San Jose, California, Edward V. [read post]
13 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
Activists are exasperated that members of Congress and President Biden have not been able to push through federal legislation that would supersede the voting laws moving through state Legislatures across the country. [read post]
18 May 2009, 5:24 am
’ (China Law Blog) Europe ECJ finds similar marks on wine and glasses not likely to cause confusion: Waterford Wedgewood plc v Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd, OHIM (Class 46) (IPKat) AG Colomer opines in Maple leaf trade mark battle: joined cases American Clothing Associates SA v OHIM and OHIM v American Clothing Associates SA (IPKat) (Excess Copyright) CFI: Restitutio and time limits: how does the law stand now for CTMs? [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 1:20 pm
(United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2007, 11:01 pm
To see what this is all about, please read this Jurist piece by William Teesdale of the Federal Public Defenders Office in Portland, Oregon. [read post]
