Search for: "Bounds v. Asset Acceptance, LLC." Results 21 - 40 of 59
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Oct 2012, 9:46 am by Stephanie Woods, Olswang LLP
This petition was not accepted by the bondholders who proposed their own plan under which the assets of Navigator would be vested in their creditors. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm by Mahmoud Khatib
Although this type of letter of intent has open terms and is not a contract, it nonetheless creates a binding obligation on the parties to continue negotiations in good faith towards the goal of executing a final contract.[19] “The parties can bind themselves to a concededly incomplete agreement in the sense that they accept a mutual commitment to negotiate together in good faith in an effort to reach final agreement within the scope that has been settled in the preliminary agreement. [read post]
11 Mar 2013, 2:04 am by Peter Mahler
A recent decision by a Manhattan trial judge in Holdrum Investments, N.V. v. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 1:27 pm
[Page 1:] The plaintiffs, Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP, Great Hill Investors LLC, Fremont Holdco, Inc., and Bluesnap, Inc. [read post]
15 Jun 2016, 3:37 pm by Paul E. Freehling
One opinion that refers to a “sole discretion” provision within a non-compete agreement is SkyHawke Technologies LLC v. [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 1:52 pm by Ilya Somin
If the Supreme Court accepted this view, it would have to overturn decisions like New York Times v. [read post]
12 Nov 2017, 12:25 pm by Wolfgang Demino
McDade, Balch & Bingham, LLP & Jason Brent Tompkins, Balch & Bingham, LLP, pro hac vice.Midland Funding, LLC, Defendant, represented by Matthew W. [read post]
12 Nov 2017, 12:25 pm by Wolfgang Demino
McDade, Balch & Bingham, LLP & Jason Brent Tompkins, Balch & Bingham, LLP, pro hac vice.Midland Funding, LLC, Defendant, represented by Matthew W. [read post]
29 Aug 2018, 6:06 pm by Francis Pileggi
  Agency Costs of Agency Capitalism and Shareholder Voting The Delaware Supreme Court said in Crown Emak Partners, LLC v. [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 4:28 am by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
            Because plaintiffs appeal an order dismissing the complaint pursuant to Rule4:6-2(e), we limit our summary of the facts to those alleged in the complaint, which we accept as true for purposes of our analysis of plaintiffs' arguments. [read post]