Search for: "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs, interested parties"
Results 761 - 780
of 1,438
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Oct 2022, 4:25 am
Under the “Initial Understanding” test, the court examines whether, at the beginning of the fiduciary relationship, the parties understood that the fiduciary would simultaneously pursue other interests, even ones related to or in direct competition with the business of the corporation. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 7:40 am
. - San Antonio, Sep 13, 2017) One of the ways to defeat a debt collection suit is to have the Plaintiff's evidence excluded. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 8:58 am
This is interesting on two fronts. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 1:42 pm
As noted above, doctors could be relevant purchasers. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 10:08 am
What is “Direct Financial Interest”? [read post]
10 Mar 2019, 11:51 am
Rather, the court held that the lower court did not commit error in accepting the plaintiff’s expert’s argument that, because the company itself will not assume any future tax liability in purchasing the plaintiff’s shares, the plaintiff “will remain liable for his share of the corporation’s tax liability for as long as he remains a shareholder and receives a K-1 reporting them. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 6:15 am
In his claim for declaratory relief, the plaintiff is requesting that the court determine the parties' rights and duties under the lease. [read post]
8 Nov 2017, 7:40 am
. - San Antonio, Sep 13, 2017) One of the ways to defeat a debt collection suit is to have the Plaintiff's evidence excluded. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 5:20 am
The plaintiffs’ claims anticipate this argument, as they go to some effort to characterize the eBook sales as direct sales between publishers and consumers, with publishers retaining title and physical possession of the eBooks. [read post]
7 Jun 2011, 1:55 pm
It is those transactions that the statute seeks to regulate; it is parties or prospective parties to those transactions that the statute seeks protect. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 8:25 pm
But if you want to defend against a petition for partition in court, these are a few options: Question the Plaintiff’s Title Interest To get a partition approved, a property owner must be a co-owner and have equitable interest. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 10:33 am
That injunction is now in effect, meaning that developers can now include in their apps “buttons, external links, or other calls to action that direct customers to purchasing mechanisms, in addition to IAP. [read post]
15 Jun 2008, 4:05 pm
Because the parties weren't ever in direct competition, this inquiry didn't go well for Natural Answers, as one might imagine. [read post]
16 Mar 2024, 7:50 am
Background of NBIS Construction In NBIS Construction, a crane company purchased a crane from a broker. [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 9:00 am
This question points to an interesting strategy by the government. [read post]
14 Jul 2019, 5:11 pm
” A claimant can show a “sufficiently close relationship” only if the majority of persons whose interests the foundation represents are Netherlands residents; if the party against who the claim is directed is Netherland resident and circumstances suggest a sufficient relationship with the Netherlands; or if the event to which the claim relates took place in the Netherlands. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 3:00 am
Gillette also features a particularly interesting discussion of the demand requirement for derivative claims arising from an unusual alignment of parties and board control. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 1:08 am
Fourth, it could be clarified that an off-exchange transaction takes place in the U.S. if either party made or accepted the offer to purchase or sell the security while in the U.S. [read post]
12 Nov 2007, 8:31 pm
The plaintiff is a former internal credit analyst for WaMu. [read post]
15 Jul 2024, 11:06 am
By contrast, the aggrieved parties here are not shareholders whose investment interests were harmed when a company’s share price plunged after alleged misrepresentations were revealed; rather, the aggrieved parties are short sellers whose investment interests were harmed when the company’s share price soared, allegedly due to misrepresentations that drove the increase. [read post]
