Search for: "United States v. Barney" Results 21 - 40 of 83
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jul 2012, 4:29 pm
District Judge Nancy Atlas ruled that the anti-retaliation clauses of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law’s whistleblower provisions don’t apply to claims filed from outside the United States. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 1:11 am by rhapsodyinbooks
Barney Rosset As recently as two years prior, the Supreme Court had ruled in Roth v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 7:24 am
In more recent cases, however, it has been suggested that under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 8:15 am by Gregory Dell
June 22, 2011 - A recent opinion from the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals has helped clarify the rules as to who you can sue in actions for benefits under a long term disability policy See Cyr v. [read post]
8 Nov 2008, 1:48 am
Sept. 30, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the fraud-on-the-market doctrine established in Basic Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2008, 1:48 am
Sept. 30, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the fraud-on-the-market doctrine established in Basic Inc. v. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 9:42 am
Clement, Solicitor General for the Unites States Department of Justice filed an Amicus Brief on behalf of big business. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 10:53 am by Joel Beck
  During the appeal process, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified three questions to the Supreme Court of Georgia. [read post]
29 Jul 2008, 9:41 pm
Julius Richmond, a distinguished health care professional who served as Surgeon General of the United States during the Carter Administration. [read post]
1 Aug 2007, 5:15 am
Amici had expected the Solicitor General to accept the recommendation of the Securities and Exchange Commission that the United States file an amicus brief in support of Petitioner to urge the Court to follow the Commission’s long-standing interpretation of the statutory and regulatory provisions at issue in this case. [read post]