Search for: "C&B Operations, LLC" Results 581 - 600 of 1,323
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Sep 2017, 8:18 am by Mark Astarita
Cohen.State Street Global Markets LLC, State Street Global Advisors Funds Distributors LLC, and State Street Bank and Trust Company agreed to pay a $32.3 million penalty to settle the fraud charges for the hidden transition services markups, which violated Sections 17(a)(1) and (3) of the Securities Act of 1933 as well as Section 15(c)(1) and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a) and (c). [read post]
30 Aug 2017, 11:31 am by John Delaney and Mona Fang
Applicability of the DMCA Section 512(c) Safe Harbor Once the court found that GYPI had standing to sue for infringement of the Erickson works, Zazzle asserted the DMCA Section 512(c) safe harbor as an affirmative defense. [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 7:31 am by Lev Martyniuk
Specifically: Revised Code Section 1705.081(D), Effect of Operating Agreement, states that “it is the policy of this chapter [1705], subject to the limitations of (B) and (C) of this section, to give maximum effect to the principle of freedom on contract and to the enforceability of operating agreements. . . [read post]
28 Aug 2017, 7:31 am by Lev Martyniuk
Specifically: Revised Code Section 1705.081(D), Effect of Operating Agreement, states that “it is the policy of this chapter [1705], subject to the limitations of (B) and (C) of this section, to give maximum effect to the principle of freedom on contract and to the enforceability of operating agreements. . . [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 6:07 pm by Lisa Milam-Perez
The Tribal Labor Sovereignty Act (H.R. 986) would amend the NLRA to clarify that it does not apply to any enterprise or institution owned and operated by an Indian tribe and located on tribal land. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 2:02 pm by Matthew Kahn
Exhibit C is a copy of the operating agreement of DMP International, LLC. [read post]
24 Jun 2017, 4:00 am by Megan B. Center
The franchisee argued that the claims fall within the arbitration clause because (a) they are not “actions” within the meaning of the exclusion clause, (b) they are not “necessary” to protect the franchisor’s property, and (c) the exclusion clause is vague and invalid. [read post]