Search for: "OXLEY v. STATE"
Results 381 - 400
of 650
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jan 2012, 8:58 am
(SEC v. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 3:21 pm
The case is DeGuelle v. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 1:23 pm
On December 16, 2011, the United States Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board issued important decision for whistleblowers and their advocates to end a year of landmark Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) decisions by the ARB, including: Vannoy v. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 10:27 am
SEC v. [read post]
28 Dec 2011, 5:00 am
In addition to state standards and Sarbanes-Oxley (“SOX”) requirements, the major U.S. stock exchanges each have their own standards for independence. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 5:00 am
In Vannoy v. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 10:56 am
But what is also true is that the employer had already sued the employee in state court for disclosing confidential information and obtained a judgement of $50,000 against him. [read post]
19 Dec 2011, 10:57 am
See also, Jones v. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 2:00 am
For those who question whether anyone is prosecuted for this offense, see People v. [read post]
24 Nov 2011, 7:51 am
Applying Stack and Oxley v Hiscock [2004] EWCA Civ 546, the judge at first instance accepted this contention, stating that he had to consider what was just and fair between the parties having regard to the whole course of dealing between them. [read post]
23 Nov 2011, 2:43 am
On September 19, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal issued an important closely watched opinion, styled Sherman v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 1:42 pm
” In Centaur Partners, IV v. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 9:53 am
Also influencing OSHA’s decision is the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kasten v. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 5:00 am
In Sharkey v. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 11:03 am
Specifically, in Menendez v. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 5:44 pm
A DOL administrative law judge erred in concluding that a company’s breach of an accounting director’s confidentiality with regard to his complaint filed with the company’s audit committee was not an adverse action under Sarbanes-Oxley whistleblower protection provisions, ruled the DOL Administrative Review Board in Menendez v. [read post]
5 Oct 2011, 3:11 pm
Menendez v. [read post]
2 Oct 2011, 3:52 pm
Sarbanes Oxley, which allow for pre-hearing reinstatement during the pendency of the case. [read post]
30 Sep 2011, 2:36 pm
Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in Burlington Northern v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 3:11 pm
Menendez v. [read post]
