Search for: "Hart v State" Results 401 - 420 of 1,143
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jul 2016, 10:42 am by Mark Tushnet
(John Hart Ely made the strongest possible case for that proposition, in connection with a single case, New York v. [read post]
28 Jun 2016, 7:41 am by Liah Caravalho
As part of the Law Library’s ongoing commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the United States Supreme Court decision, Miranda v. [read post]
20 Jun 2016, 3:12 am by Amy Howe
At Casetext, Terry Hart analyzes last week’s ruling in in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
12 Jun 2016, 7:26 am by Andrew Koppelman
John Hart Ely, who died in 2003, is widely cited but has few followers. [read post]
22 May 2016, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
On 16 May 2016 Sir David Eady heard a PTR in the case of Bloor v Beresford. [read post]
20 May 2016, 6:45 am
McLaughlin and Yafit Cohn, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, on Friday, May 13, 2016 Tags: Acquisition agreements, Contracts, Corporate fraud, Delaware cases, Delaware law, Due diligence, Fair values,Fairness review, Liability standards, Merger litigation, Mergers & acquisitions, Reliance Genuine Parts Co. v. [read post]
There are significant additions to the Senate bill that are not presently contained in the House bill, including a whistleblower immunity provision, a shorter statute of limitation (3 years v. 5 years), lower exemplary damages (2 times v. 3 times actual damages), as well as increased criminal penalties for a violation of the Economic Espionage Act and it also includes portions of the DTSA as predicate offenses for the RICO Act. [read post]
27 Mar 2016, 2:54 pm
Section V then posits an alternative analysis, normatively autonomous (though not entirely free) of the orbit of the state, a vision possible only when the ideological presumptions of the state are suspended. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 7:55 am by Rebecca Tushnet
 HLA Hart’s discussion of the internal viewpoint on an institution; less worry about litigation and more about what one ought to do. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 3:19 am by Peter Mahler
In Broida, the court concluded that jurisdiction could be exercised over an action involving the internal affairs of a foreign corporation doing business in New York, unless New York was an inappropriate or inconvenient forum (id. at 91-92; see Hart v General Motors Corp., 129 AD2d 179, 185-186 [1st Dept 1987], lv denied 70 NY2d 608 [1987]). [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 3:19 am by Peter Mahler
In Broida, the court concluded that jurisdiction could be exercised over an action involving the internal affairs of a foreign corporation doing business in New York, unless New York was an inappropriate or inconvenient forum (id. at 91-92; see Hart v General Motors Corp., 129 AD2d 179, 185-186 [1st Dept 1987], lv denied 70 NY2d 608 [1987]). [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 3:19 am by Peter Mahler
In Broida, the court concluded that jurisdiction could be exercised over an action involving the internal affairs of a foreign corporation doing business in New York, unless New York was an inappropriate or inconvenient forum (id. at 91-92; see Hart v General Motors Corp., 129 AD2d 179, 185-186 [1st Dept 1987], lv denied 70 NY2d 608 [1987]). [read post]