Search for: "F. v. F."
Results 2881 - 2900
of 57,900
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2023, 6:23 am
Schindler v Isller & Schrage, P.C., 262 AD2d 226 [1st Dept 1999], lv dismissed 94 NY2d 791 [1999] [plaintiff granted judgment on Judiciary Law § 487 claim as defendant law firm knowingly withheld crucial information from court in underlying action]; cf Betz v Blatt, 160 AD3d 696 [2d Dept 2018] [defendant attorney was properly denied summary dismissal of Judiciary Law § 487 claim based on allegations that he filed blatantly deficient accounting with court, which… [read post]
4 May 2023, 9:05 pm
It is a common refrain, mostly on the political right, that considering environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) factors when investing is probably illegal.[1] The basis for this argument derives from the fiduciary duty of loyalty and its corollary, the “sole interest” or “exclusive benefit” rule, enshrined in both federal and state law, which prohibits fiduciaries from investing for any purpose other than the financial well-being of the beneficiary. [read post]
4 May 2023, 1:57 pm
So if Elizabeth Warren wants to write a letter to Amazon asking it not to promote a conspiracy book by Robert F. [read post]
4 May 2023, 12:59 pm
Rogers v. [read post]
4 May 2023, 10:25 am
That doctrine, which flows from McCulloch v. [read post]
4 May 2023, 7:48 am
In this regard, patent litigators Müller and Müller-Stoy criticize that “[i]f only one patent per family is reviewed for essentiality as planned, the register will not provide any transparency”, and “[s]imilar problems apply with respect to different patent claims in the same patent. [read post]
4 May 2023, 3:58 am
Smart Study Co. v. [read post]
4 May 2023, 2:30 am
., v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 10:30 pm
The recent InterDigital v Lenovo Judgment in the UK “f[ound] no value in InterDigital’s Top-Down cross-check in any of its guises”, despite huge amounts of expert work. [read post]
3 May 2023, 7:50 am
EVE-USA, Inc., 13 F. [read post]
3 May 2023, 7:38 am
MacNaughton v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 6:00 am
See Schnabel v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 5:00 am
See Walmart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2023, 3:58 am
Madigan , 702 F.3d 933, 935 (7th Cir. 2012). [read post]
2 May 2023, 2:32 pm
In Fox v. [read post]
2 May 2023, 2:06 pm
In another instance, an officer said to a motorist, “[i]f you run your mouth, I will book you in jail for it. [read post]
2 May 2023, 11:45 am
Water Dist. v. [read post]
2 May 2023, 6:10 am
Wilson, 60 F.4th 770 (4th Cir. 2023) (summarized here). [read post]
1 May 2023, 8:55 pm
McGlynn of the Southern District of Illinois, in Barnett v. [read post]
1 May 2023, 5:58 pm
UMG’s executives clearly wanted to stake out a strong position on AI during the company’s quarterly earnings call on Wednesday, but legal battles over AI-generated music won’t be easy, and will make fights over the I-iii-IV-V chord progression look downright quaint by comparison. [read post]
