Law office management; report of Special Committee on Law Office Management of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York.

"Kenneth E. Walser, chairman."

Law office and court procedure,

Mode of access: Internet.

Law office management /

Mode of access: Internet.

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 50 - Korrespondenzen u.a. an die Firma A. L. Stamm & Co (p. I 23, 190-421)

9 Briefe und Beilage zwischen Alfred Sohn-Rethel und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1940 sowie Briefwechsel mit Joan M. Levi; 6 Briefe zwischen Joan M. Levi und Max Horkheimer, 1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Assistac Westcent, 25.06.1937; 1 Brief von John MacMurray an Walter Adams, 19.05.1937; 1 Brief von Walter Adams an Theodor W. Adorno, 01.06.1937; 2 Briefe zwischen Charles Somlo & Co und Max Horkheimer, 06.06.1939, 12.09.139; 1 Brief von Martin Sommerfeld an Max Horkheimer, 29.05.1934; 3 Briefe von Josef Sondek an Max Horkheimer, 1937, 1942; 3 Briefe zwischen Elsa Sontheimer, Max Sontheimer und Max Horkheimer, Februar 1940, 07.03.1940; 1 Drucksache von der The Southard School an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von der Soziologischen Verlagsanstalt an Gertrud Janosi, 20.07.1931; 9 Briefe zwsichen Maurice J. Speiser und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1948; 2 Briefe zwischen de Spengler und Max Horkheimer, 30.11.1936, 27.01.1937; 5 Briefe zwischen Sterling D. Spero und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1937; 1 Lebenslauf von Herbert Spielberg; 1 Brief und 2 Beilagen von René A. Spitz an Max Horkheimer, 23.06.1938; 2 Briefe von Elsa Spriesterbach an Max Horkheimer, Juli 1949; 1 Brief von Ida M. Stadie an Max Horkheimer, 21.05.1937; 20 Rechnungen von A. L. Stamm & Co an Max Horkheimer, 1938-1939; 1 Brief von Rose Horkheimer an A. L. Stamm und Co, 28.09.1938; 1 Betriebsanleitung und 1 Auslieferugnsschein für Max Horkheimer vom Standard Air Conditioning, 03.03.1936; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Standard Air Conditioning, 28.03.1936; 5 Briefe zwischen Taylor Starck und Max Horkheimer, 1943; 8 Briefe zwischen Hans Staudinger und Max Horkheimer, 1937, 1943; 1 Briefauszug und Beilage von Paul Stefan, 1940 sowie Briefwechsel mit Samuel R. Wachtell; 1 Brief von Samuel R. Wachtell an Gertrude Blitz, 23.10.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Leo Löwenthal und Samuel R. Wachtell, September 1940, 23.10.1940; 1 Brief von Loe Löwenthal an Hermann Kesten, 01.10.1940; 7 Briefe und Beilage zwischen George Stefansky und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen dem Refugee Section of the American Friends Service Committee und Max Horkheimer, 16.05.1940, 28.05.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen dem Institute of International Education und Max Horkheimer, 09.04.1940, April 1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Friess, 01.03.1940; 1 Brief vom Institute of Sociology Malvern und Max Horkheimer, 31.01.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Stein und Max Horkheimer, 30.11.1934, 1936, 1937; 7 Briefe von Estell A. Stein an Max Horkheimer, 1929, 1937; 1 Brief von Franz Stein an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von Friedrich Pollock an Gertrude R. Stein, 22.03.1939; 1 Brief von Leo Stein an Max Horkheimer, 25.07.1944; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Emilia Steinacher, 20.07.1937; 4 Briefe zwischen Friedrich Steinfeld und Max Horkheimer, 1941, 1945; 1 Brief und Beilage von Eugene G. Steinhof an Max Horkheimer; 3 Briefe zwischen Ernst Steinitz und Max Horkheimer, 25.04.1938, April 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Theodor Steltzer und Eric E. Warburg, 07.03.1948; 4 Brief zwischen Hermine Sterler und Max Horkheimer, 11.09.1939, 1939, 1941; 4 Briefe zwischen Alfred K. Stern und Max Horkheimer, 1938, 1940 sowie 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Max Gottschalk; 1 Brief von Max Gottschalk an Max Horkheimer; 2 Briefe und 1 Beilage zwischen Erich Stern und Max Horkheimer, 26.02.1937, 17.03.1937; 2 Briefe und Beilage von Eugene I. Stern an Max Horkheimer, 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Joseph M. Weidberg und Max Horkheimer, 15.07.1938, 29.07.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Cooperative Bureau for Teachers, 03.02.1938; 12 Briefe zwischen Günther Stern und Max Horkheimer, 1936, 1938 sowie Briefwechsel mit John Guggenheim Memorial Foundation; 3 Briefe und 1 Beilage zwischen der John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation und Max Horkheimer, 1937; 1 Brief vom Social Research Quarterly an Max Horkheimer, 03.01.1937; 3 Briefe zwischen Hugo Stern und Max Horkheimer, 06.12.1937, Dezember 1937;

The compleat General Counsel /

Mode of access: Internet.

The form of process, before the Lords of Council and Session, observed in advocations, ordinary actions, suspensions : shewing also, the manner of making protestations for remedy in law, and how summons thereon was brought before the Parliament of Scotland : and the way how, since the union, such process is laid before the House of Peers : with the form of process before the Lords of Session, as commissioners appointed by Parliament, for plantation of kirks, valuation and sale of tythes : to all which is prefix'd the present state of the College of Justice, giving an account of the members thereof, and of the order observed by the Lords of Session in judging causes : with the fees and prices of writs paid to the several offices and members of the session : written for the use of students in Spotiswood's College of Law /

Mode of access: Internet.

Cosmo, Cosmolino: Patent law and nanotechnology

Patent law has a significant instrumental and symbolic role in regulating nanotechnology. A 2011 report of the United States Federal Trade Commission noted that ‘the patent system plays a critical role in promoting innovation across industries from biotechnology to nanotechnology, and by entities from large corporations to independent inventors’. This chapter considers the much contested legal, ethical and social issues involved with regulating the patenting of nanotechnology. Section I considers the efforts of patent offices to classify nanotechnology and the empirical evidence about patent filing rates. Section II examines whether there is a ‘tragedy of the anticommons’ emerging in respect of nanotechnology. It contemplates access mechanisms – such as the defence of experimental use, patent pools, open innovation models and technology transfer. Section III explores ethical and social concerns associated with nanotechnology – in particular, issues about the impact upon human health and the environment.

Patenting genes and gene sequences: Analysis of public health implications and the law

At issue is whether or not isolated DNA is patent eligible under the U.S. Patent Law and the implications of that determination on public health. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued patents on DNA since the 1980s, and scientists and researchers have proceeded under that milieu since that time. Today, genetic research and testing related to the human breast cancer genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 is conducted within the framework of seven patents that were issued to Myriad Genetics and the University of Utah Research Foundation between 1997 and 2000. In 2009, suit was filed on behalf of multiple researchers, professional associations and others to invalidate fifteen of the claims underlying those patents. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears patent cases, has invalidated claims for analyzing and comparing isolated DNA but has upheld claims to isolated DNA. The specific issue of whether isolated DNA is patent eligible is now before the Supreme Court, which is expected to decide the case by year's end. In this work, a systematic review was performed to determine the effects of DNA patents on various stakeholders and, ultimately, on public health; and to provide a legal analysis of the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and the likely outcome of the Supreme Court's decision. ^ A literature review was conducted to: first, identify principle stakeholders with an interest in patent eligibility of the isolated DNA sequences BRCA1 and BRCA2; and second, determine the effect of the case on those stakeholders. Published reports that addressed gene patents, the Myriad litigation, and implications of gene patents on stakeholders were included. Next, an in-depth legal analysis of the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and methods for analyzing it was performed pursuant to accepted methods of legal research and analysis based on legal briefs, federal law and jurisprudence, scholarly works and standard practice legal analysis. ^ Biotechnology, biomedical and clinical research, access to health care, and personalized medicine were identified as the principle stakeholders and interests herein. Many experts believe that the patent eligibility of isolated DNA will not greatly affect the biotechnology industry insofar as genetic testing is concerned; unlike for therapeutics, genetic testing does not require tremendous resources or lead time. The actual impact on biomedical researchers is uncertain, with greater impact expected for researchers whose work is intended for commercial purposes (versus basic science). The impact on access to health care has been surprisingly difficult to assess; while invalidating gene patents might be expected to decrease the cost of genetic testing and improve access to more laboratories and physicians' offices that provide the test, a 2010 study on the actual impact was inconclusive. As for personalized medicine, many experts believe that the availability of personalized medicine is ultimately a public policy issue for Congress, not the courts. ^ Based on the legal analysis performed in this work, this writer believes the Supreme Court is likely to invalidate patents on isolated DNA whose sequences are found in nature, because these gene sequences are a basic tool of scientific and technologic work and patents on isolated DNA would unduly inhibit their future use. Patents on complementary DNA (cDNA) are expected to stand, however, based on the human intervention required to craft cDNA and the product's distinction from the DNA found in nature. ^ In the end, the solution as to how to address gene patents may lie not in jurisprudence but in a fundamental change in business practices to provide expanded licenses to better address the interests of the several stakeholders. ^

Back in Blue: The Successful Reintegration of Combat Veteran Law Enforcement Officers.

In the past ten plus years, several million national guard and reserve component military personnel have been deployed in support of the global war on terrorism. Tens of thousands of those personnel also serve as full-time law enforcement officers in police and sheriff's offices around the country. Life as a law enforcement officer is tough enough, but when combined with the psychological baggage brought on by months of war, reintegrating into civilian life and the role of a law enforcement officer can be extremely difficult. This article discusses a reintegration program specifically for law enforcement agencies that is designed to promote long-term psychological and social health in combat veteran officers. The program's costs are offset by the many assets (leadership, tactical training, etc.) these men and women bring to the department. By committing to the long-term successful reintegration of these individuals, departments enhance their own forces and improve community safety.

Branch Offices - General Motors Building [Detroit News]

1 of 3

Branch Offices - General Motors Building [Detroit News]

2 of 3