Search for: "PRICE v. U.S."
Results 381 - 400
of 6,710
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2023, 1:39 pm
A second important issue is that, in its current form, the proposal seems myopically focused on prices. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm
Sam Rayburn and the U.S. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 9:05 pm
Share buybacks have returned with a vengeance following the COVID-19 pandemic.[1] The average proportion of buybacks out of aggregate shareholder payouts in 2019-2021 was higher than the historical average during 2005-2019 in the U.S. and Europe.[2] These developments have attracted broad criticism from academics and policymakers, with many seeking to curb share buybacks to reduce the risks of insider trading, market manipulation, the harm to long-term shareholder value, and other… [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 1:51 pm
While it’s not baseless, administrative-law scholars doubt the FTC’s position, which rests on a dated opinion from the U.S. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 1:01 am
Howell v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:28 am
Wilkinson is Microsoft's renewed motion to dismiss: DeMartini et al. v. [read post]
18 Apr 2023, 1:51 pm
LLC v. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 2:58 pm
Schutte v. [read post]
14 Apr 2023, 9:00 am
High-risk zones start with the letters A or V, while low-to-moderate risk zones include zones B, C, and X. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 9:01 pm
In Powell v. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 1:25 pm
Triple Canopy had six fixed-price contracts with the U.S. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 9:00 pm
If we were to view it this way, the law would survive, according to cases such as Ward v. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 7:15 am
Since the U.S. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 3:44 pm
United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911) in favor of treating “Bigness” as an independent antitrust harm. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 3:44 pm
United States, 221 U.S. 1 (1911) in favor of treating “Bigness” as an independent antitrust harm. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 12:52 pm
And patent pools bring price transparency to video-codec standards. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 11:23 am
” (See Price v. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 3:12 am
Cal.Implications for sanctions motion in United States et al. v. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 1:46 pm
In Intel v. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 6:15 am
Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) and Ortiz v. [read post]