Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Holding: selling software through a company's online service is enough to establish minimum contacts in the state where that company is located. Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, 937 F.Supp. 161 (D. Conn. 1996). [13] Here, Inset Systems claimed that Instruction Set's website made an infringing use of Inset's registered trademark.
Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997), was a decision by the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania holding that a court has personal jurisdiction over a website originating in a different territory, if the website is accessible to Internet users in the court's territory.
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
In this case, their 16-year-old son was arrested for burglary, selling marijuana and other offenses. They were required to pay a small fine. Baratta said the conviction was later overturned on appeal.
Sometimes, with regard to a particular provision of a written constitution, only one court decision has been made. By necessity, until further rulings are made, this ruling is the leading case. For example, in Canada, "[t]he leading case on voting rights and electoral boundary readjustment is Carter.
Farah Constructions v Say-Dee Pty Ltd, also known as Farah, is a decision of the High Court of Australia. [1] The case was influential in developing Australian legal doctrines relating to equity, property, unjust enrichment, and constructive trusts, [2] as well as the doctrine of precedent as it applies in Australia.
Besides its impact on legal jurisprudence, the rationale and precedent set by Greenman v Yuba Power Products, Inc. has also aided the judgement of several cases that followed it. O'Neil v. Crane Co. , an important California case in 2012 which dealt with product liability against an asbestos manufacturer whose product caused severe injuries to ...
[1] [2] Since its establishment, the CFPB has actively gone after banks and other financial service providers that have been determined to be "bad actors", such as when it fined Wells Fargo $100 million due to the Wells Fargo cross-selling scandal. [1] The CFPB had been seen as a bane by the Republican Party and as