Search for: "Hoopes v. Hoopes" Results 61 - 80 of 413
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 May 2011, 7:28 pm by admin
 “The ARB has now removed ridiculous hoops that SOX complainants were required to jump through, which hoops were plainly inconsistent with the plain meaning of the statute,” Zuckerman said. [read post]
7 Sep 2015, 2:47 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  Delaware Court Questions Disclosure-Only Settlement of Merger Objection Lawsuit:  As discussed here, in a July 8, 2015 decision in Acevedo v. [read post]
16 May 2016, 9:15 am
Take the case I read the other day, Goodrich v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 1:33 pm
The client will have to jump through a few hoops first, but that's nonetheless an effective way for the client (but, I might add, not the attorney) to get out of a mandatory arbitration clause. [read post]
23 Jun 2008, 3:25 pm
Second, there's some disdain for ticky-tack and technical denials of standing - much needed disdain in my view, but I could see future litigants argue "why should we have to jump through a silly and easy to jump through hoop? [read post]
26 Aug 2010, 5:37 pm by Jonathan Zasloff
”  In other words, it is asking the Court to create another procedural hoop for the states to jump through. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 1:43 pm by Allard Knook
The Court held that that the procedure established under Art. 259 TFEU was designed to obtain a declaration that the conduct of a Member State was in breach of EU law and to terminate that conduct (see, to that effect, Joined Cases 15/76 and 16/76 France v Commission [1979]; Case C-456/05 Commission v Germany [2007]; and Joined Cases C-514/07 P, C-528/07 P and C-532/07 P Sweden and Others v API and Commission [2010]).Thus, as the aim of the Treaty was to achieve the… [read post]