Search for: "Chrysler Corp." Results 181 - 200 of 374
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2017, 3:38 am by Daniel Bussel
” cite to the more recent Chrysler case, which controversially approved such a sale in an order that the Supreme Court subsequently vacated as moot. [read post]
28 Jul 2008, 12:00 pm
July 1, 2008).Masquat isn't a drug or device case, but it's such a run of bad luck in a class action context that we can't resist mentioning it.In Masquat, owners of certain Dodge and Chrysler cars built on the LH platform brought a putative class action pleading a defect in the power rack and pinion steering system. [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 2:26 am
., 825 F.2d 118 (6th Cir.1987), and the Eighth Circuit's approach in Chrysler Motors Corp. v. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 11:48 am by Cynthia L. Hackerott
In Chrysler Corp, the High Court addressed a challenge by a federal contractor to OFCCP regulations regarding agency disclosures to third parties under the Freedom of Information Act. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 5:05 pm by support
Chrysler recalls 9,688 Dodge Charger police vehicles Chrysler is recalling 9,688 Dodge Charger police vehicles to change and relocate the ABS/ESC fuse and replace the headlamp jumper harness. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 7:20 pm
Corp.), 544 F.3d 420 (2d Cir. 2008) (pdf), affirming dismissal of the equity committee's appeal was a notable one. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 9:02 am by Greg Mersol
Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011, 1020 (9th Cir. 1998), and therefore can’t be trusted to adequately represent the interests of the proposed class. [read post]
17 Mar 2010, 8:00 pm by adio
Honda Motor Corp. issued a recall of over 400,000 Odyssey minivans and Element trucks due to a potential problem with the brake system. [read post]
9 Dec 2009, 8:22 pm by Victoria VanBuren
(post available here) Also in October, Chrysler Insurance Co. v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 7:03 am
The case was Daimler/Chrysler v. [read post]
21 May 2010, 4:34 am by Sean Wajert
The court also instructed the parties that they may consider the rulings of Chrysler Corp. v. [read post]