Search for: "Williams v. Watkins"
Results 21 - 40
of 125
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Dec 2023, 2:25 pm
Most importantly it places her case in a history of LGBTQ rights litigation, including Watkins v. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 5:00 am
The Delaware Chancery Court took a skeptical view as a result, but observed that "motive to avoid a deal does not demonstrate lack of a contractual right to do so" (The Williams Companies, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2011, 3:00 pm
See also Colonel William Winthrop, USA, Military Law and Precedents, at 1022 (2d Ed., 1920). [read post]
8 Mar 2007, 5:20 am
See Watkins v. [read post]
15 May 2019, 12:56 pm
Consovoy seeks to invoke a 1957 case, Watkins v. [read post]
27 Jun 2016, 7:32 pm
In an expedited deal litigation matter, in The Williams Company, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 6:21 am
This post is based on a Latham & Watkins M&A Commentary by Mr. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 6:41 am
O’Brien III, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, on Thursday, January 19, 2023 Tags: Cryptocurrency, M&A, Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Securities Act, SPACs, Wong v. [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 6:41 am
O’Brien III, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, on Thursday, January 19, 2023 Tags: Cryptocurrency, M&A, Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, Securities Act, SPACs, Wong v. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 4:00 am
Watkins v. [read post]
21 May 2008, 2:11 pm
Watkins v. [read post]
11 Oct 2022, 6:58 am
Roman Martinez (Latham Watkins) is set to argue for Warhol and Lisa Blatt (Williams Connolly) for Goldsmith. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 6:24 am
FLIR Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Mar 2012, 2:07 pm
In State of Tennessee v. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 9:02 pm
Brennan stated in his dissent in Watkins v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 2:36 pm
Williams v. [read post]
6 May 2022, 3:00 am
Supreme Court written by Justice Samuel Alito that would overturn Roe v. [read post]
11 Apr 2007, 1:15 am
Fitzsimmons, Watkins Glen, for appellant. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 5:15 am
Granting amendment to name these necessary parties would be improper, as the statute of limitations to bring claims against these parties has passed (Watkins v. [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 5:15 am
Granting amendment to name these necessary parties would be improper, as the statute of limitations to bring claims against these parties has passed (Watkins v. [read post]