Search for: "Stocking v. Marsh"
Results 21 - 40
of 57
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jul 2013, 10:32 pm
For more details on this important decision, please see John Marsh’s instructive analysis of the decision. [read post]
15 Jan 2013, 6:18 am
Artists have no right to the “reality” of their subject matter, said the First Circuit, but reality is the “news photographer’s stock-in-trade. [read post]
3 Dec 2012, 1:24 am
Jones, 529 U.S. at 856 (quoting Russell v. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 3:46 am
Was Amy the victim of some massive stock fraud, perhaps? [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 12:31 pm
Another group of courts found that the exclusion was ambiguous or required to be interpreted based on history of the exclusion and looked at the presentations of the insurance industry to the various insurance commissioners in the various states “Doer v. [read post]
9 Jun 2012, 5:13 am
As usual, John Marsh has written a very thoughtful analysis of the case, and provided excellent advice in his post, Acordia of Ohio v. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 11:27 am
In July, I wrote about Marsh USA v. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 11:52 am
Lowell v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 2:10 pm
Light v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 2:10 pm
Light v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 3:26 pm
--Court: Supreme Court of TexasOpinion Date: 6/24/11Cite: Marsh USA Inc v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 8:31 am
A company’s provision of stock options to employees was deemed satisfactory consideration for a non-compete agreement in Marsh USA Inc. and Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 7:24 am
See last week's Texas Supreme Court opinion in Marsh USA Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2011, 6:26 am
More from BusinessInsurance.com Stock Options Offer Valid in Marsh Noncompete Dispute: Texas High Court. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 2:23 pm
In State of Oregon v. [read post]
30 Jan 2011, 4:07 pm
Kevin Marsh has an interesting post on the BBC College of Journalism blog entitled “A culture of contempt“. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 11:56 am
Allen, Ethan Hazelton, Douglas V. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 3:16 am
Clingman retained 12% of Marquis common stock, and refused an offer to sell back his shares and sign a non-compete agreement. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 12:00 pm
In Illinois, the Supreme Court acts like this area of law doesn't exist.I will continue to follow the Marsh case and opine on what I'm sure will be a reversal. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 6:33 am
My good friend Mike Maslanka has an excellent post up on his Work Matters Blog this week discussing the Texas Supreme Court's granting review of Marsh USA Inc, et al. v. [read post]
