Search for: "Marine Holdings, Inc." Results 601 - 620 of 694
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Dec 2008, 10:36 pm
A later case allowed workers compensation defendants to hold all the informal interviews they wan [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 2:31 pm by Chukwuma Okoli
When parties enter into a contract, they should be careful about the terms they incorporate into the contract because the law will hold them bound by those terms. [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 6:21 pm by Chukwuma Okoli
From Okoli and Oppong (2020), and my assessment of reported cases, jurisdiction agreements have only been upheld in five cases: Nso v Seacor Marine (Bahamas) Inc (2008) LPELR-CA, Beaumont Resources Ltd v DWC Drilling Ltd (2017) LPELR-42814 (CA), Nika Fishing Co Ltd v Lavina Corporation (2008) 16 NWLR (Pt 1114) 509, Megatech Engineering Ltd Sky Vission Global  Networks LLC (2014) LPELR-22539 (CA) and Damac Star Properties LLC v Profitel Limited (2020) LPELR-50699 (CA). [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm by renholding
This figure is significantly lower than in 2016, when the Delaware Court of Chancery effectively put an end to the practice of disclosure-only settlements in In re Trulia Inc. [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 6:50 am
This post examines an opinion from the Wisconsin Court of Appeals:  Laughland v. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:04 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
(A139222; 230 Cal.App.4th 85; Marin County Superior Court; CV1103591, CV1103605.) [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 6:52 am by Schachtman
At times, the judiciary’s resistance to delving into the factual underpinnings of expert witness opinions is extraordinary. [read post]
16 Mar 2023, 5:04 am by Seán Binder
  MAGA Inc, a super PAC supporting former President Trump, has accused Flori [read post]
5 Jul 2010, 7:59 pm by Steven M. Taber
EPA alleges that Oxarc, Inc. failed to update their Risk Management Program at least every five years. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 11:05 am by John Elwood
Munsingwear, Inc., which held that “where intervening mootness prevents appellate review of [an] underlying decision, the decision below ordinarily should be vacated,” the Supreme Court should vacate the 5th Circuit’s judgments granting mandamus. [read post]