Search for: "BANKS V. STATE" Results 6101 - 6120 of 15,344
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Sep 2024, 12:19 pm by Will Yeatman
Specifically, Dodd-Frank provided that the NBA preempts a state consumer financial law if the state law “significantly interferes with the exercise by the national bank of its powers. [read post]
6 Nov 2022, 1:09 am by Frank Cranmer
There was a more nuanced Press Release from Scotland, which stated “The Proclamation of the bank holiday will be delivered to the Privy Council in time for the meeting of Wednesday 9 November”. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 1:55 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: (As of 20/10/22) The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc v Ukraine (Represented by the Minister of Finance of Ukraine acting upon the instructions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine) Nos. 2 and 3, heard 9-12 December 2019 East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust v Flowers and Ors, heard 22 June 2021 Fearn and others v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery heard 7th December 2021 Stanford… [read post]
23 Aug 2010, 7:44 pm by Kevin Funnell
One of the advantages of a national bank or federal thrift charter used to be that for those banks or thrifts that engaged in mortgage lending on a multi-state scale, the mortgage operations could be housed in an operating subsidiary that had all the benefits of federal preemption that were afforded the parent bank or thrift (as confirmed by the Watters v. [read post]
3 May 2007, 1:14 pm
The case is 134 Original, New Jersey v. [read post]
23 Aug 2011, 4:07 pm by James McComish
Joyce v Sunland Waterfront (BVI) Ltd [2011] FCAFC 95 (19 August 2011)   Related posts:Australian Lawyers and Overseas Clients An interesting and unusual case before the State Administrative Tribunal... [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 2:24 am by gmlevine
In contrast to Morgan Stanley and Medimmune and consistent with America Online, Citigroup and Royal Bank of Scotland, the majority in Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation v. [read post]