Search for: "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs, interested parties"
Results 401 - 420
of 1,422
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2022, 10:06 am
Otherwise, the deal parties run the risk that the FTC may materially alter the terms of their bargained-for exchange after the fact. [read post]
1 Jul 2018, 8:16 am
Therefore, the court concludes that the purchase of Tempur-Sealy AdWords to direct users to the Mattress Firm Web Page supports a finding [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 2:34 pm
A very interesting case just decided on Thursday, Caren EE. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:33 am
After all, the law does not require the employers in question to use contraception, to purchase or subsidize the purchase of contraception, or even, to use the phrase the Court repeatedly invoked in Hobby Lobby, to “provide coverage” for the purchase of such contraceptives. [read post]
26 Nov 2008, 8:23 pm
The IT consultant eventually purchased Discovery Attender (or “Sherpa”) to perform the necessary electronic data searches. [read post]
19 Nov 2010, 2:03 pm
The plaintiffs (investors) argued that the PSLRA was inapplicable because the options contracts were not securities; nor were their ownership interests in the LLCs.Investment ContractsOwnership interests in the LLCs were “investment contracts” that constituted securities within the meaning of the securities laws, the court concluded. [read post]
18 Mar 2013, 6:07 am
The court began by noting the differences between commercial disparagement and defamation; the former targets harm to the economic interests of the injured party arising from false, disparaging statements about the party’s property, usually a product or service. [read post]
21 Sep 2010, 6:00 am
In short, since "indirect purchasers" cannot bring federal antitrust claims — even if they were injured by antitrust violations — "indirect purchasers" like third-party payors and retailers have to resort to state law. [read post]
6 Jul 2014, 12:26 pm
Rather, the injured third party generally has to rely on the insured, which has an interest in ensuring the availability of the coverage it purchased, to comply with the reporting provision in its policy. [read post]
Why Virginia will not be invited to the dance (the Supreme Court battle over the individual mandate)
17 Oct 2011, 8:15 pm
The 11th Circuit analysis indicates "Although the question of the state plaintiffs’ standing to challenge the individual mandate is an interesting and difficult one, in the posture of this case, it is purely academic and one we need not confront today. [read post]
3 Oct 2019, 11:20 am
The complaint purports to be filed on behalf of a class of persons who purchased Capital One securities between February 2, 2018 and June 29, 2019. [read post]
7 May 2022, 5:01 am
Heller determines that, based on his experience, the Plaintiff must also purchase television ads to counter the negative ads aired on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, "and perhaps other social media. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 6:38 am
Under the foregoing arrangements, it is clear that there is no direct contract between the vessel interests and the delivery contractor. [read post]
15 Aug 2007, 6:40 am
The 1996 Act allows no right of direct action against the company on behalf of a member as a plaintiff. [read post]
12 Dec 2009, 6:14 pm
Another option would be for the creditor to purchase the spouse’s joint interest, and then re-sell the property. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 4:34 pm
Cogentrix of North Carolina.ANR Coal establishes a four-part test for evident partiality:the extent and character of the personal interest, pecuniary or otherwise, of the arbitrator in the proceeding;the directness of the relationship between the arbitrator and the party he is alleged to favor;the connection of that [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 4:34 pm
Cogentrix of North Carolina.ANR Coal establishes a four-part test for evident partiality:the extent and character of the personal interest, pecuniary or otherwise, of the arbitrator in the proceeding;the directness of the relationship between the arbitrator and the party he is alleged to favor;the connection of that [read post]
9 Sep 2020, 6:16 am
FIRST PROTECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY d/b/a FRONTLINE INSURANCE, Appellee. 2nd District.Insurance -- Third-party beneficiaries -- Language of the policy of insurance clearly reflects that plaintiff was not intended to primarily and directly benefit from the policy where policy expressly stated that it was only between the named insured and the insurer, and that there was no contract of insurance between insurer and plaintiff. [read post]
23 May 2011, 11:18 am
A review of the transcribed proceedings at which the parties attempted to negotiate a settlement revealed that the parties never reached an agreement on the essential and material term regarding the purchase price of the apartment. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 4:13 pm
Appeals -- Non-final orders -- Order declaring that certain provisions of a settlement agreement are binding and enforceable, and directing parties to reconvene settlement negotiations, is a non-appealable, non-final order -- Argument that court has jurisdiction under rule which provides for the appeal of non-final orders concerning injunctions is rejected -- Order is not designed to protect property or other rights from injury by prohibiting or commanding certain acts, and is more… [read post]
