Search for: "Latter Day Products LLC" Results 1 - 20 of 188
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am by Bernard Bell
The Court explained that the first statement “is state action taken in his official capacity as school board president;” while “the latter is private action taken in his personal capacity as a friend and neighbor. [read post]
14 Mar 2024, 6:56 am by centerforartlaw
Consumers might also be misled into believing that the handbag is an authentic product endorsed by the original luxury brands, which could result in claims of false endorsement or false advertising. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 9:06 am by Unknown
ExxonMobil argues that the proponents are asking the company to change its day-to-day business by altering the mix of the products it sells, or even eliminating some products entirely. [read post]
31 Aug 2023, 3:55 am by SHG
But winning arguments also aren’t Rudy’s strength these day. [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 3:27 pm by Larry
These, however, are not typical days in customs law as the Section 301 duties imposed on products from China continue to raise issues. [read post]
15 Jun 2023, 12:01 pm by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A.
When this is the case, it is virtually impossible for the party opposing the production to obtain, review, and prepare particularized objections to the records all within 10 days. [read post]
14 May 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
First, the agreement requires College Parent to vote in favor of the Board’s recommendations on director nominations (and against any nominees not recommended by the Board) and other routine matters, such as “say on pay” and auditor ratification.[9] Second, for other non-routine matters submitted for a stockholder vote, College Parent was required to vote either in favor of the Board’s recommendation or pro rata with all other Company stockholders.[10] Each of these voting… [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 8:52 am by Arthur F. Coon
In a 72-page published opinion filed March 30, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 4) affirmed in full the trial court’s judgment, which upheld the EIR for the Oakland Waterfront Ballpark District Project (project) with the sole exception of its wind mitigation measure. [read post]