Portland Science, Technology & Internet Lawyer, New York

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.


Includes: Biotechnology, Computer Law, Domain Names, Electronic Commerce, Internet

Gregg G Brandon

Intellectual Property, Science, Technology & Internet, Entertainment, Business & Trade
Status:  In Good Standing *Status is reviewed annually. For latest information visit here           Licensed:  24 Years

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.

Lawyer.com

TIPS

Easily find Portland Science, Technology & Internet Lawyers and Portland Science, Technology & Internet Law Firms. For more attorneys, search all Industry Specialties areas including Admiralty & Maritime, Advertising, Agriculture, Aviation, Communication & Media Law, Energy, Entertainment, Gaming & Alcohol, Oil & Gas, Transportation & Shipping and Other Industries attorneys.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Goldston v. Bandwidth Technology Corp.

Under well-established rules applicable to the principal-agent relationship, defendant Bandwidth Holdings Corp. and its wholly owned subsidiary, Bandwidth Technology Corp. (BTC), are bound by the retainer agreement signed by their president, Jonathan Star. Star had at least ...

Rakowicz v. Fashion Institute of Technology

In order to prevail on a cause of action pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1), a plaintiff must establish a violation of the statute and that such violation was a proximate cause of his or her injuries (see Zimmer v Chemung County Performing Arts, 65 NY2d 513, 524 [1985]; Skalko v ...

MATAPOS TECHNOLOGY LIMITED v. Compania Andina de Comercio Ltda

Plaintiff demonstrated it was a holder of the subject notes, and had a capacity to sue thereunder. Defendant failed to demonstrate a genuine defense to the notes. The notes were made payable to a Delaware corporation that later merged with another Delaware ...

© 2024 LAWYER.COM INC.

Use of this website constitutes acceptance of Lawyer.com’s Terms of Use, Email, Phone, & Text Message and Privacy Policies.