Search for: "Securities Co. v. United States" Results 701 - 720 of 4,143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Feb 2016, 10:06 am by Brianne Gorod
–stage amicus brief on behalf of a bipartisan group of former members of Congress in support of the Obama administration in United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 2:30 am by NCC Staff
It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 7:32 am by John H Curley
Grievant was employed as an armed nuclear security officer at Exelon Generation Co.'s Oyster Creek nuclear generating facility in Forked River, N.J. [read post]
30 Jul 2010, 5:00 am by J Robert Brown Jr.
Jurisdiction also is available where conduct occurred outside the United States but which had a foreseeable substantial effect within the United States. [read post]
18 Feb 2012, 5:49 pm by Tom Goldstein
  Here is what Justice Ginsburg wrote: Montana’s experience, and experience elsewhere since this Court’s decision in Citizens United v. [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
Numerous studies show that Chevron deference is currently the exception rather than the rule, and since 2001’s United States v. [read post]
10 Nov 2019, 4:00 am by INFORRM
While Justice Thomas has cast some doubt on this form of analysis in his opinion in Reed v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 1:26 pm
“Marriage Equality,” as the New York statute is entitled, has been a hard fought battle.New York’s highest court held that there was no state constitutional right to same-sex marriage in Hernandez v. [read post]
7 Jun 2015, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman
Title VII was already on the books, but, when first asked in General Electric Co. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2013, 11:43 am by Tejinder Singh
Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co., holding that when a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) specifies a limitations period, that period – including the date it begins to run – is enforceable unless it is “unreasonably short. [read post]
9 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm by Erin Miller
In some instances, like in United States v. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 7:12 am
In this connection, the United States Supreme Court has recently made clear that plaintiffs in a securities class action must show they suffered actual economic losses that are actually caused by the defendants’ alleged misrepresentations and that this requirement is not satisfied by the presumption of reliance arising where defendants allegedly commit a fraud against the whole market for the securities.[1] This raises the specter of individual issues in… [read post]