Search for: "Williams v. Sears, Roebuck and Co." Results 1 - 20 of 21
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Feb 2014, 4:00 am by Kimberly A. Kralowec
Sears, Roebuck and Co., 214 Cal.App.4th 974 (2013), review denied Faulkinbury v. [read post]
After Sears, Roebuck & Co. merged with Kmart Corp. in 2005, the board of Sears Holdings Corp. inherited directors from both companies. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 3:51 pm by PaulKostro
Sears Roebuck & Co., 138 N.J. 2 (1994), stating: In 1960, the Legislature passed the Consumer Fraud Act “to permit the Attorney General to combat the increasingly widespread practice of defrauding the consumer. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am by Bexis
  Indeed, precisely that scenario is how we ended up with Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 7:10 pm by Kelly Phillips Erb
It was copied by Richard Warren Sears in 1894 when the first Sears, Roebuck and Co. mail order catalog hit the post. [read post]
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO.; from Dallas County; 5th district (05-07-00758-CV, 270 SW3d 632, 08-21-08, pet. denied Sep. 2009) (breach of indenture agreement)09-0050JOHNNY RODRIGUEZ, JR. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2014, 12:00 pm by Mary Pat Dwyer
Williams 13-587Issue: Whether the court of appeals exceeded its authority to grant a writ of habeas corpus when it completely disregarded and ignored this Court’s well-established precedent of Woodford v. [read post]
1 Nov 2008, 3:12 am
(Ars Technica) CAFC: Co-inventors contribution must be 'more than the exercise of ordinary skill'; NTP awarded attorneys' fees: Oren Tavory v NTP (Patently-O) (Law360) (Law360) (Property, intangible) (Patent Prospector) (Property, intangible) PTO announces no IDS or Markush Rules during Bush Administration (Patent Prospector) (Hal Wegner) (Patently-O) (Patent Docs)   Global Global - General Exploding the intangible asset market cap myth (IP Think Tank) … [read post]
23 Dec 2007, 8:00 pm
: (IPEG),More on the implementation of the London Agreement and patent cost reduction in Europe: (Patent Baristas),ECJ rules that EU legislative obligations cannot be enforced in any Member State if that legislation has not been published in the Official Journal in the language of that Member State (Case C-161/06  OlomoucSkoma-Lux sro v Celni reditelstvi Olumouc): (IPKat),EPO fighting complex appl [read post]