Search for: "AMENDMENT TO RULES FOR MANAGEMENT OF COURT FUND"
Results 601 - 620
of 2,644
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2010, 3:02 am
In a February 22, 2010 opinion (here), Southern District of New York Judge Richard Holwell granted with prejudice the motion of defendants to dismiss the subprime-related securities class action lawsuit that had been filed against State Street Corporation, its management arm, and two executives and eight trustees of the management arm and one of the funds it managed, the Yield Plus Fund. [read post]
22 Oct 2016, 10:00 pm
The Supreme Court found that “compelled funding of government speech does not alone raise First Amendment concerns” and there is no right not to fund government speech. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 12:30 pm
So qualified immunity for the agent from the fund managers' Fourth Amendment claims. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 5:36 am
After reviewing comments submitted on the proposed amendments, NMFS published the Final Rule. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 5:11 pm
And you aren’t wrong that a 1988 version of the rules was upheld in 1991 against a First Amendment challenge and a claim that the rules at that time were arbitrary and capricious. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 4:30 pm
Tribunal judges can now sit as county court judges, but if they are to do so, then why shouldn’t county court rules – on evidence, on process, on costs – equally apply? [read post]
13 Aug 2007, 5:27 am
Between July 2002 and October 2003, more than 100 pension funds filed individual lawsuits against WorldCom in state courts; the actions were ultimately removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. [read post]
14 Jul 2008, 4:12 am
The matter went to court and was heard over the last two weeks.Vodafone argued that the deal was not taxable in India as the funds were paid outside India for the purchase of shares in an offshore company that the tax liability should be borne by Hutch; that Vodafone was not liable to withhold tax as the withholding rule in India applied only to Indian residence that the recent amendment to the IT act of imposing a retrospective interest penalty for withholding… [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 9:34 am
Representative Brad Sherman (D-Cal) echoed Huizenga’s concerns and applauded the Commission for adopting Rule 30e-3, which will allow mutual funds to send certain documents electronically. [read post]
17 Sep 2024, 8:18 am
Courts have described the balancing as “whether the [state]’s legitimate administrative interests outweigh the employee’s First Amendment rights. [read post]
6 Jun 2022, 4:18 am
In so ruling Justice Emerson found that Moskowitz’s claim accrued when the accountants filed the amended return in 2016, and that their subsequent filing of returns in 2017 and representation of the LLC in the IRS audit did not cause Moskowitz any additional damages and therefore did not extend the accrual date. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 9:30 pm
The Supreme Court ruled that the prohibition against “excessive fines” in the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. [read post]
4 Mar 2009, 4:16 am
Fish and Wildlife Service regarding activities that are funded, carried out or authorized by the federal government. [read post]
3 Jan 2012, 9:21 pm
Court of Appeals. [read post]
5 Jan 2009, 11:00 am
(1) Campaign finance and disclosure rules are obviously constitutionally sensitive matters: Limiting campaign contributions implicates First Amendment concerns, and requiring contributors to disclose the recipients of their support implicates privacy concerns as well. [read post]
29 Nov 2016, 7:30 pm
Lately, Art. 17 (3) EGBGB was amended. [read post]
11 Oct 2019, 6:03 am
Adams, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, on Friday, October 4, 2019 Tags: Capital markets, Disclosure, IPOs, JOBS Act, Reporting regulation, SEC, Securities Act, Securities Act Rule 163, Securities regulation Response to CII Proposal to Amend DGCL Posted by David Berger and Amy Simmerman, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, on Friday, October 4, 2019 Tags: Controlling shareholders, Council of… [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 9:50 am
Supreme Court rulings have defined the permissible scope of land-use conditions under the federal “takings” clause. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 9:50 am
Supreme Court rulings have defined the permissible scope of land-use conditions under the federal “takings” clause. [read post]
14 Mar 2015, 6:48 pm
These included:legislation to include seniors, those subject to informal care (such as Aids patients), family members, and people in LGBTI relationships.administrative changes to recognise these legislative changes, including the terms of funding agreements for domestic violence services.legislation, based on my lobbying, to ensure that children were not witnesses in their parents' domestic violence court cases.Police reliance on statistics and other measures to… [read post]
