Search for: "State v. State" Results 6101 - 6120 of 258,451
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2024, 1:50 pm by Eugene Volokh
I don't know whether the allegations are sound, but the lawsuit certainly bears watching.The post Battle of the Tech Titans, <i>Musk v. [read post]
” The bench of Justices Surya Kant, Diapankar Datta and K V Vishwanathan, while relying on a pre-decided case of Javed and others vs. [read post]
Strict abortion laws have been prevalent in the state following the US Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 11:01 am by Dennis Crouch
The PTAB relied on CyberSource Corp. v. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 8:32 am by Amanda M. Sample and Ellen T. Berge
Last month, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California attempted to tackle these questions in response to a motion to dismiss in Della v. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 7:15 am by Lawrence Solum
  Here is the abstract: The decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 6:30 am
Davis, and Rose James, Teneo, on Monday, February 26, 2024 Tags: affirmative action, Anti-DEI, dei, Diversity, Stakeholders, Transparency Oregon State Treasury Nomination Neutrality Posted by Philip Larrieu, Oregon State Treasury, on Monday, February 26, 2024 Tags: Board of Directors, Director nominations, fiduciary duty, Proxy access, shareholder interests, Universal Proxy Rebellion extinction: Does Exxon mark the end of shareholder engagement? [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 6:30 am
Davis, and Rose James, Teneo, on Monday, February 26, 2024 Tags: affirmative action, Anti-DEI, dei, Diversity, Stakeholders, Transparency Oregon State Treasury Nomination Neutrality Posted by Philip Larrieu, Oregon State Treasury, on Monday, February 26, 2024 Tags: Board of Directors, Director nominations, fiduciary duty, Proxy access, shareholder interests, Universal Proxy Rebellion extinction: Does Exxon mark the end of shareholder engagement? [read post]
The Alabama House passed a bill and the state Senate unanimously passed another on Thursday that would safeguard access to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) following the Alabama Supreme Court decision in LePage v. [read post]
1 Mar 2024, 6:12 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Furthermore, in the third action, plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for fraud, as he did not sufficiently allege out-of-pocket losses that stemmed from any alleged fraud, but rather, asserted only speculative losses (see Lama Holding Co. v Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 421 [1996]). [read post]