Search for: "Power-One Inc. v. United States" Results 801 - 820 of 3,369
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jun 2020, 4:29 am by Peter Mahler
Shareholder Derivative Claims Against Entities Controlled by Majority Shareholders Defeated by Doctrine of In Pari Delicto    Rutigliano v Absolute Electrical Contracting of NY, Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op 31768(U) [Sup Ct NY County June 4, 2020], involves a dispute regarding the ownership and control of a unionized electrical contracting business (Absolute) from which the plaintiff one-third shareholder allegedly was frozen out by his fellow shareholders. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 3:58 am by Jesse Mondry
(GE Energy Power Conversion France SAS, Corp. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2020, 7:44 am by Kristian Soltes
As a result, indirect purchaser class actions in the United States often are not certified for class treatment under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 23”) or comparable class action rules in state courts. [read post]
8 Jun 2020, 10:13 am by Schachtman
On the other hand, Section 1961(1)(A), of the federal criminal code, also refers to “bribery. . . .chargeable under State law and punishable for imprisonment for more than one year. . . . [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 1:17 am by Schachtman
  One extraordinary but distinguishable case from the Fourth Circuit suggests that a notorious screening physician, the late Dr. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 10:35 am by Schachtman
Federal and State Prosecutions against Physicians and Screening Companies After Judge Jack’s exposé of fraudulent and false diagnoses in the silicosis MDL, various news media reported that the United States Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York was investigating possible criminal charges against the physicians and lawyers who orchestrated the screenings. [read post]
21 May 2020, 8:47 am by Kristian Soltes
The capability is rolling out in the United States and 27 other global markets, PayPal says, and will be free to start with. [read post]
11 May 2020, 1:09 am by Schachtman
The premise is that cross-examination cannot undo the damage that has been done by the expert who has power over the jury. [read post]
10 May 2020, 9:01 pm by Rodger Citron
”The appeals court described the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. [read post]
3 May 2020, 7:19 am by Eric Goldman
On appeal, Edwards argues that his conviction must be reversed and rendered because section 97-45-17 is unconstitutionally overbroad in violation of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and unconstitutionally vague in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. [read post]