Search for: "Georgia Pacific Corp"
Results 1 - 20
of 207
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jul 2014, 9:52 pm
Georgia-Pacific Corp., an appeal from the Supreme Court of Texas, the plaintiff was diagnosed with mesothelioma. [read post]
22 Apr 2010, 2:46 pm
On April 19, 2010, Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP (“Georgia Pacific”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337. [read post]
3 May 2009, 3:06 am
***See alsoOf the appealed Georgia-Pacific case-->Georgia-pacific Corporation, Appellant, v. [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 7:47 am
The complaint names US Home Corp., Greystone Nevada LLC, Lennar Nevada, Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC and Georgia-Pacific LLC. [read post]
9 Feb 2011, 10:49 am
Georgia-Pacific Corp (civil case) [uploaded: 02/09/2011] [read post]
17 Jul 2014, 1:07 am
Georgia Pacific Corp., the Texas Supreme Court rejected the "any exposure" or "some exposure" theory of causation, and held that a "substantial factor test" applies to causation in asbestos cases. [read post]
Tax Court Upholds $37m Penalty Against TP Who Relied on Tax Opinion Issued by PWC for $800k Flat Fee
6 Aug 2010, 5:56 am
The Tax Court yesterday held that Chesapeake Corp.'s transfer of a wholly-owned subsidiary to a joint venture with Georgia Pacific Corp. was a disguised sale under § 707(a)(2)(B), resulting in a $524 million capital gain. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:56 pm
Kimberly-Clark Corp., No. 10-3519 (7th Cir. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 10:11 am
Georgia-Pacific Corp., No. 1:08-CV-1394 (S.D. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 5:57 am
" Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 3:13 pm
Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP v. [read post]
29 Sep 2013, 9:00 am
Just such a “fact-intensive inquiry” was undertaken by the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan last week in Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP v. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 7:31 am
Because [plaintiff's expert] used the [Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 9:26 am
"[Defendant] is correct that the [revenue-sharing] agreement cannot be considered under [Georgia-Pacific] factor 12. [read post]
6 Sep 2006, 5:18 am
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. [read post]
27 Sep 2011, 6:11 am
The court understands Plaintiffs’ argument about relevance under Georgia-Pacific factor 12, but both factor 12 and [Uniloc USA, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 11:41 am
Indianapolis, Indiana - A patent attorney for GS CleanTech Corporation of Alpharetta, Georgia ("CleanTech") filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the District of Idaho alleging that Pacific Ethanol Magic Valley, LLC of Burley, Idaho ("Pacific"); ICM, Inc. of Colwich, Kansas; and David J. [read post]
16 Sep 2019, 9:08 am
Army Corps of Engineers redefining the term “Waters of the United States” in the CWA violated the Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act; and the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, et al. v. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 12:10 am
Maybe so, but in this fictional world it is close enough because the starting premise . . . is at least arguably grounded in the evidence and the rule of thumb calculation and the Georgia-Pacific factors are so widely accepted. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 9:17 am
The Courts have determined royalty rates by using the 15 Georgia Pacific factors. [read post]
