Search for: "State v. Price" Results 561 - 580 of 13,187
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
This post is the first of four looking at the decision of Smith J in Lidl & another v Tesco & another [2023] EWHC 873 (Ch). [read post]
22 May 2023, 7:46 am by Eric Goldman
Before the state bar could reach that conclusion, they would have to do more work to validate that the 236 entries are indeed misdirected, something this court punted on. [read post]
  The panelists also indicated that FINRA is using CAT data to surveil cross-market and cross-product (i.e., options impacted by swap trading), fractional share order marking (i.e., held v. not held), and firms’ pricing of fractional share fills based on a review of representative orders. [read post]
18 May 2023, 9:01 pm by Michael C. Dorf
Last week, in National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) v. [read post]
There has also been previous FCA enforcement in this area, see for instance FCA v Barnett Michael Alexander (2011) and FCA v Corrada Abbattista (2022). [read post]
17 May 2023, 9:46 am by Paige Collings
For example, some lower-priced technologies collect more data than other technologies, such as inexpensive smartphones that come with preinstalled apps that leak data and can’t be deleted. [read post]
17 May 2023, 5:01 am by Anthony Sanders
In another, a barber and a dry cleaner in Alabama won their right to offer services below a minimum price set in a New Deal-era price-fixing scheme. [read post]
15 May 2023, 9:12 am by The Regulatory Review Staff
October 13, 2022 | Negotiating Prices with Drug Manufacturers | The Inflation Reduction Act aims to constrain rapidly increasing drug prices in the United States. [read post]
15 May 2023, 5:01 am by Anthony Sanders
Finally, in Part V we'll look at how Baby Ninths protect us at a practical level, but also what their larger lesson is. [read post]
14 May 2023, 9:00 pm by Neil H. Buchanan and Michael C. Dorf
(That essay also explains the math that we used to derive the 40,100 percent interest rate stated above.)Our overall bottom line does not change, however, because the fundamental objection to all of the gimmicks has less to do with the exact interaction of the words of the key statutes than it does with a fundamental principle of statutory interpretation. [read post]