Search for: "UNITED STATES TRUST COMPANY v. State" Results 241 - 260 of 2,027
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Sep 2020, 7:26 am by Eric Goldman
A federal district court preliminarily enjoined Executive Order 13943 seeking to kick WeChat out of the United States. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 7:00 am by Amy Howe
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, a forum-selection case, and United States v. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 8:45 am by David Kemp
Self-described as the “largest [law firm] in the United States devoted solely to business litigation,” the firm recently made headlines as being counsel for Samsung in the much-watched Samsung v. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 12:50 am
The primary jurisdiction invoked is in respect of the securities fraud pursuant to United States law, and a supplemental jurisdiction is alleged of the common law claims, again pursuant to United States law, on the grounds that the same facts and circumstances give rise to all claims. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 12:33 pm by WIMS
Appealed from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. [read post]
18 Mar 2017, 8:00 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
United States Department of Transportation (Public Transportation Project – Sacred Places)Union Pacific Railroad Company v. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 2:29 pm
In 1948, the Bank’s headquarters were transferred to Amman, Jordan, where it was officially incorporated as a public shareholding company. [read post]
12 Aug 2020, 2:12 pm by Unknown
Snoqualmie Casino (Tribal Sovereign Immunity)Zurich American Insurance Company v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 1:42 am by Matrix Legal Information Team
The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd & Anor v United Utilities Water plc, heard 6-8 May 2014. [read post]
27 Aug 2010, 5:34 am
Aug. 12, 2010), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that nothing in Section 13(a) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“ICA”), as originally enacted or as subsequently amended, either created a private right of action or implied that such a right exists with the clarity and specificity required under United States Supreme Court precedent. [read post]