Search for: "Price v. Myers"
Results 61 - 80
of 156
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Aug 2012, 7:51 am
Marchese v. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 7:27 am
Zell v. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 7:27 am
Zell v. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 12:19 pm
For example, the Georgia Court of Appeals found that a tax return preparation firm made reasonable efforts to maintain the secrecy of its customers’ list because it: (i) did not publish the list; (ii) established companywide policies to protect the information from disclosure to third parties; (iii) counseled its employees regarding the policies; (iv) limited access to its customer database to certain employees and the information was password protected; and (v) employees permitted… [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 8:07 am
Bolger v. [read post]
4 Mar 2022, 8:07 am
Bolger v. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 8:43 am
We might learn more about the Court of Appeal's views on this from Pfizer v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am
Bristol-Myers Squibb, 1998 WL 812318, at *46 (M.D. [read post]
26 Mar 2010, 6:05 am
off theory of capital structure is usually understood (see Myers 2003). [read post]
17 Feb 2017, 6:06 am
Yes, it’s true that lowered gas prices and a slowly improving economy play a role. [read post]
25 Dec 2022, 2:14 am
Kresge Co. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 12:50 pm
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., 353 F.3d 848, 852 (10th Cir. 2003); In re Norplant Contraceptive Products Liability Litigation, 955 F. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 10:00 pm
The Plaintiffs argued the unconstitutionality of the Medicare Negotiation Program under the Fifth Amendment by relying on Michigan Bell v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
In FTC v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 5:00 am
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., No. 12 Civ. 2238 (JPO), slip op. [read post]
29 Nov 2019, 8:08 am
Either one wants to argue that indirectly-imposed costs count, or one doesn't.Expect more posts on FTC v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
Clay v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 9:36 am
” EEOC v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 11:51 pm
Lee Pharma v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 1:58 pm
However, the class action complaint alleges the purported $120 per share consideration fell well below the market price of the VMware stock that the Class V stock was intended to track. [read post]
