Search for: "Matter of David B."
Results 781 - 800
of 3,125
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Nov 2019, 3:23 pm
FAR 3.301(b). [read post]
25 Nov 2019, 7:42 am
Rakoff and David M. [read post]
22 Nov 2019, 2:05 pm
I hope the following links, excerpts, comments, and reflections (in no particular order) will prove of interest for one reason or another to our readers. [read post]
22 Nov 2019, 5:51 am
Securities and Exchange Commission, on Wednesday, November 20, 2019 Tags: Agency costs, Disclosure, Institutional Investors, Political spending, SEC, SEC rulemaking, Securities regulation, Shareholder voting, Transparency Supreme Court Review of SEC’s Authority to Seek Disgorgement Posted by Greg Andres, Robert Cohen and Paul Nathanson, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, on Thursday, November 21, 2019 Tags: Disgorgement, Rule… [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 12:12 pm
By citing Charles’s case, Morris was trying to make the general point that guarding against a foreign power corrupting the president was an important matter to address—and the Founders agreed. [read post]
13 Nov 2019, 6:30 am
For the symposium on David S. [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 9:04 am
Matter of Michael R. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 12:30 pm
Landis & Loria B. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 2:35 am
Ehrenberg, 124 AD3d 159 (2d Dept, 2014) “Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 5:59 am
But each largely makes four basic points: (a) The concept of executive privilege is hotly disputed; (b) there are very few relevant court cases and none that provide definitive answers; (c) there are a number of historical incidents, from the administration of George Washington to that of Barack Obama, that are of debatable—and contested—significance; and (d) the legal resolution of these highly disputed questions is likely of little practical significance. [read post]
31 Oct 2019, 2:00 am
David Bernard is the CEO of AssessFirst. [read post]
30 Oct 2019, 5:00 am
It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 12:44 pm
David Cicilline had introduced a bill, the U.S. [read post]
25 Oct 2019, 10:00 am
Briefly put, the statute repeats parts of the common law definition of defamation, see Restatement (Second) of Torts § 559, comment b, which the Alaska Supreme Court in Gottschalk v. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 10:40 am
Ali and David E. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 8:36 am
Last month, the military commission for the matter of United States v. [read post]
18 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
Berg, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, on Friday, October 11, 2019 Tags: Institutional Investors, International governance, Merger litigation, Mergers & acquisitions, Private equity, Shareholder activism CEO Pay Growth and Total Shareholder Return Posted by Joseph Bachelder, McCarter & English LLP, on Saturday, October 12, 2019 Tags: Executive Compensation, Executive performance, Management, Peer… [read post]
16 Oct 2019, 12:31 pm
And suppose that aversion to high taxes or cash grants means that 3a and b simply won’t happen. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 4:38 pm
Nor do I mean the capacity—or inclination—of courts to produce social change against the tide of dominant political forces, which I shall call judicial independence.Extensions, Applications, and Friendly AmendmentsIn illuminating and complementary posts, David Marcus and Aaron-Andrew Bruhl draw attention to judicial capacity issues in the lower federal courts that I do not discuss at any length in my book. [read post]
4 Oct 2019, 2:35 pm
Nicholas Bruno, Marcos Rosales, David J. [read post]
