Search for: "Non-Party Merchants"
Results 21 - 40
of 627
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Aug 2020, 5:33 pm
See Merchants Ins. [read post]
9 Apr 2013, 7:09 am
If that is the case, though, their interests may conflict with that of the parties who hired them. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 1:06 pm
On that question, the parties dispute whether §518 is a valid commercial speech regulation under Central Hudson Gas & Elec. [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 3:33 am
Imagine if there was a medium of exchange where it was quick and easy for the consumer, no risk of fraud or loss to the merchant, and no third party sticking its finger in the middle to pull out a few points for doing nothing? [read post]
15 Feb 2013, 9:59 am
” The Notice encompasses 27 pages and can be overwhelming to the non-lawyer reader. [read post]
19 Jun 2008, 8:00 pm
" Unfortunately for you merchants of NSFW* content on employers' systems, not so fast. [read post]
27 Mar 2007, 6:46 am
Merchant has and had no more duty to respond to attempts to "sell" him one of your clients' boilerplate, non-negotiable $3750 settlements than he has to return cold calls from pushy life insurance salespeople. [read post]
7 Apr 2013, 1:21 pm
If that is the case, though, their interests may conflict with that of the parties who hired them. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 6:54 am
However, despite the setting and the purportedly computer network specific problem addressed, we are persuaded that the claims are more likely than not directed to the abstract idea of using an associated non-merchant party and a second communication link to verify the authenticity of a requested transaction taking place on a first communication link. . . . [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 9:33 am
Under the traditional public-private divide in privacy law, cases in which the privacy-invading party is in the public sector get analyzed under a 4th amendment framework, and cases in which the privacy-invading party is in the private sector get analyzed under a hodgepodge of non-4th amendment frameworks including privacy torts, trade secret law, state and federal statutes, etc. [read post]
5 Sep 2018, 1:39 pm
These antisteering provisions prohibit merchants from implying a preference for non-Amex cards; dissuading customers from using Amex cards; persuading customers to use other cards; imposing any special restrictions, conditions, disadvantages, or fees on Amex cards; or promoting other cards more than Amex. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 3:12 pm
As I explained in my preview, vertical price and non-price agreements are judged under the rule of reason, which provides that business practices only violate the antitrust law when their effect is to restrain trade unreasonably. [read post]
31 Oct 2008, 8:07 pm
On September 10, 2008, Timberland Company, an outdoor clothing and shoe merchant, along with co-defendant ad agencies GSI Commerce Inc. [read post]
18 Feb 2024, 12:02 pm
That would collapse the FRCP 65’s restriction on binding non-litigants who have not been subjected to judicial process. [read post]
27 Feb 2013, 1:18 pm
Or could the parties agree that the loser in the arbitration pays the experts’ fees? [read post]
1 Apr 2021, 8:44 am
Binding all retailers to the litigation strategy and settlement terms acceptable to such a small group of non-representative plaintiffs is patently unfair. [read post]
21 Nov 2023, 9:05 pm
Merchants would also be freed from the MFN, as the condo owner would not attempt to ban merchants from steering customers to a lower-cost platform. [read post]
14 May 2023, 5:51 pm
A Non-Compete Clause is a type of restrictive covenant that is designed to protect the business of an employer from competition from a particular party. [read post]
13 Aug 2013, 2:00 am
The Notice yelps about Form 1099-K, better known as Merchant Card and Third Party Network Payments, which discloses how many non-cash receipts your business brought in. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 12:41 pm
This requires a review of the competent evidential materials in the light most favorable to the non-moving party to determine whether a rational fact-finder could resolve the issue in favor of the non-moving party. [read post]
