Search for: "T A V Holdings Inc" Results 5841 - 5860 of 12,085
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jan 2015, 5:00 am by Kevin
Alpha Tau Omega Fraternity Inc. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 8:09 am
  These questions, among other things, find a response in High Court for England and Wales, Chancery Division's ruling of Mr Justice Arnold in Enterprise Holdings Inc v Europcar Group UK and Another [2015] EWHC 17 (Ch), which Katfriend Aaron Wood (Swindell & Pearson Ltd) kindly reports. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 6:44 am by Joy Waltemath
In reviewing an agency regulation promulgated through rulemaking, the court was required to apply the two-step analytical framework outlined in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 3:29 am by Peter Mahler
All of which makes all the more unusual and instructive the recently decided case of Charron v Sallyport Global Holdings, Inc., Opinion and Order, 12-cv-06837 [SDNY Dec. 10, 2014], in which one 50% shareholder bought out the other 50% shareholder for almost $41 million pursuant to a buyout agreement with a jerk insurance provision setting a $65 million threshold and, in the event of a company sale within the following year, giving the seller 20% of the entire proceeds… [read post]
17 Jan 2015, 6:20 am by Ben
More here.A New York federal judge has largely rejected Sirius XM Holdings Inc’s request to reconsider her Nov. 14 decision in favour of members of the 1960s band The Turtles over the payment of royalties for songs made before 1972. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 7:52 am by John Elwood
Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, Inc., 14-144 (involving a First Amendment challenge to license plate restrictions), and Bullard v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 6:11 am
Y–3 Holdings, Inc., 87 Cal.App. 4th 1153 (California Court of Appeals 2001).American International Group, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:15 pm by Walter Olson
Now the False Claims Act case of Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 9:57 am by Maureen Johnston
§ 1 et seq., as held by this Court in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]