Search for: "Basic Energy Services, L.P. "
Results 1 - 14
of 14
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Mar 2009, 8:35 am
Basic Energy Services, L.P. agreed to pay $250,000 and consented to substantial injunctive relief to settle a sex discrimination and retaliation suit brought by the U.S. [read post]
4 Dec 2014, 4:36 am
Basic Energy Services, L.P. is a warning about the perils of an oral agreement for a risky downhole procedure. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 11:51 am
TXU Portfolio Management Company, L.P. [read post]
19 Jan 2007, 7:07 am
Calpine to seek financing for Chapter 11 exit, LA Times, January 18, 2007 Investor Relations, Calpine Calpine Seeks Investors To File Chapter 11 Exit, Examiner.com, January 17, 2007 Related Web Resource: Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Basics, US Courts.gov [read post]
8 Feb 2020, 9:58 am
Appellants Atrium Medical Center, L.P., and Texas Healthcare Alliance, LLC, appeal a judgment in favor of appellee Houston Red C LLC d/b/a ImageFirst Healthcare Laundry Specialists, finding that appellants breached a laundry service agreement and are jointly and severally liable for damages, costs, interest and attorney's fees. [read post]
8 May 2015, 8:15 am
SCOTT PEDEN, ADVANCE TRUST & LIFE ESCROW SERVICES, L.T.A., AND PURCHASE ESCROW SERVICES, LLC v. [read post]
24 Jun 2015, 6:13 am
See High Sierra Energy, L.P. v. [read post]
10 Dec 2020, 7:44 am
Specific holdings: Under the DMCA, a lower grandfathered royalty rate is paid by some music services that were early providers of digital music transmissions. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 2:29 pm
Shale Energy II, LLC v. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 12:18 pm
Instead, the 2012 MOU was akin to the “term sheet” in Cedar Fair, L.P. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:56 am
Instead, the 2012 MOU was akin to the “term sheet” in Cedar Fair, L.P. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 5:00 am
See Basic, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 12:03 pm
County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502 (which had held EIR adequacy questions could be mixed questions of law and fact, not always reviewed under substantial evidenced standard) Project description reviewed as matter of legal adequacy – and upheld because there was a specific description of a single project – there were two possible allocations of use between office and residential, but basic project was still identified Cumulative impact and traffic impact claims reviewed under… [read post]
13 Sep 2007, 10:48 am
Last week the New Jersey Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision (6-0) ordered a nationwide third-party payer class action decertified. [read post]