Search for: "May v. Board of Directors"
Results 821 - 840
of 5,375
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Feb 2007, 4:40 am
That occurred in the case of Fog Cutter Capital Group Inc. v. [read post]
5 Nov 2023, 1:02 pm
Read the lengthy but very interesting decision at Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment, et al v. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 5:00 am
Crown was able to unilaterally appoint two directors to the seven-director board. [read post]
10 Oct 2012, 10:32 am
See Belkin International, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 5:00 am
May 6, 2011). [read post]
18 May 2018, 6:05 am
National Amusements, Inc., May 17, 2018, Bouchard, A.). [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 7:10 am
The Review Board is made up of experts independent of USADA with medical, technical and legal knowledge of anti-doping matters who are appointed for two-year terms by the USADA Board of Directors. [read post]
17 Sep 2022, 3:18 pm
In Seminaris v. [read post]
1 Jan 2015, 4:01 pm
In the closing days of its November term, the Illinois Supreme Court agreed to decide The Board of Education of the City of Chicago v. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 8:17 am
Vice Chancellor Laster’s recent opinion in Goldstein v. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 8:17 am
Vice Chancellor Laster’s recent opinion in Goldstein v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 8:05 am
Inc. v. [read post]
24 Dec 2012, 11:46 am
The court has not yet released its decision on costs, but given this board’s brazen disregard for owners’ democratic rights, this seems like a suitable case for the directors to be held personally responsible for the legal costs as in Boily v. [read post]
27 Oct 2009, 7:45 am
Baker v. [read post]
23 Aug 2017, 4:00 am
" Petitioner also alleged that the School Board acted in bad faith as evidenced by its creating new positions, including a Director of Social Studies, Director of Science, Technology and Engineering, Director of Science and an Assistant Superintendent for Special Education position. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 11:10 am
The Court concluded that “a board of directors [of a California corporation] may lawfully bind itself in a merger agreement to forbear from negotiating or accepting competing offers. [read post]
3 May 2024, 6:30 am
Moll (University of Houston), on Tuesday, April 30, 2024 Tags: close corporations, Closely-held corporations, contractual formalism, corporation, formalism, oppression, reasonable expectations, shareholder oppression, Shareholders Action Items for Boards: Where Directors and C-Suite Leaders Align and Diverge Posted by Frank Kurre, Protiviti; Mark Rogers, BoardProspects; and Michael Tae, Broadridge Investor Communication Solutions, on Tuesday, April 30, 2024 Tags:… [read post]
3 May 2024, 6:30 am
Moll (University of Houston), on Tuesday, April 30, 2024 Tags: close corporations, Closely-held corporations, contractual formalism, corporation, formalism, oppression, reasonable expectations, shareholder oppression, Shareholders Action Items for Boards: Where Directors and C-Suite Leaders Align and Diverge Posted by Frank Kurre, Protiviti; Mark Rogers, BoardProspects; and Michael Tae, Broadridge Investor Communication Solutions, on Tuesday, April 30, 2024 Tags:… [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
RUEDA, Appellant V. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 6:19 am
The Supreme Court recently handed down its judgment in the case of Eclairs Group Ltd v JKX Oil & Gas Plc [2015] UKSC 71 (read our Case Preview here). [read post]
