Search for: "State v. Shell" Results 401 - 420 of 1,366
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2018, 5:50 am by Matthias Weller
for claims against its subsidiary – sometimes with success, sometimes not: For example, in Okpabi & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor, the English High Court, Queen’s Bench Division, by its Technology and Construction Court, decided that it had no international jurisdiction to hear claims in tort against the Nigerian subsidiary (SPDC) of Royal Dutch Shell (RDC) in connection with environmental and health damages due to oil pollution in the context of… [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 8:50 am by Steven M. Gursten
” Notably, the Notice and Order of Prohibition was a direct response to the Michigan Supreme Court’s decision in Rory v. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 9:41 pm by Timothy B. Lee
In a Monday court filing for the case formally known as Ingenuity LLC v. [read post]
”2 In so acting, Congress stated that bad actors seek to conceal their ownership of business entities through the use of shell companies in order to facilitate illicit activities including money laundering, the financing of terrorism, human and drug trafficking, and securities fraud.3 The lack of state laws requiring companies to identify their beneficial owners has arguably enabled such persons to exploit these entities to further criminal activities. [read post]
”2 In so acting, Congress stated that bad actors seek to conceal their ownership of business entities through the use of shell companies in order to facilitate illicit activities including money laundering, the financing of terrorism, human and drug trafficking, and securities fraud.3 The lack of state laws requiring companies to identify their beneficial owners has arguably enabled such persons to exploit these entities to further criminal activities. [read post]
”2 In so acting, Congress stated that bad actors seek to conceal their ownership of business entities through the use of shell companies in order to facilitate illicit activities including money laundering, the financing of terrorism, human and drug trafficking, and securities fraud.3 The lack of state laws requiring companies to identify their beneficial owners has arguably enabled such persons to exploit these entities to further criminal activities. [read post]
8 Dec 2013, 1:15 pm
Earlier this week, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal issued a decision in the case of Taylor v. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 6:27 pm by Matthew David Brozik
‘Happy Birthday to You’ belongs to you, and to me, and to every person in these United States, whether he or she has documentation or not. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 3:41 pm by Colin O'Keefe
- Portfolio manager Mike Shell of Shell Capitol Management on his blog, Asymmetric Investment Returns Why did Joe Paterno transfer his house to his wife for a $1? [read post]