Search for: "Price v. Superior Court"
Results 881 - 900
of 1,086
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Mar 2009, 12:22 pm
When those conditions are satisfied, NYNEX's holding (which is consistent with much of the Supreme Court's general jurisprudence about the monopolist's freedom to optimal pricing, e.g., Trinko, Linkline) that deceptive or fraudulent conduct that merely results in higher prices but not exclusion cannot be the basis of a Section 2 claim. [read post]
4 Sep 2010, 4:30 am
More to the point, as the Supreme Court clarified in KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2023, 10:42 am
United States v. [read post]
3 Jun 2021, 3:00 am
(C071785; 39 Cal.App.5th 708; Yolo County Superior Court; CVCV091258.) [read post]
15 Jan 2008, 4:30 am
The court found no relation between the suggested retail price of the products and the damages sought and remanded the suit to state court.NO CONTROVERSY BECAUSE NO CAFA “Dusty Bottoms: Time for plan B. [read post]
19 May 2011, 7:16 am
The Court found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success on their claim that Section 5.2(a)(v) of the merger agreement was an unreasonable defensive measure. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 1:44 pm
In 2016, Jordan set stricter boundaries and presumptive ceilings – namely 18 months in provincial courts from charge to the end of trial and 30 months for Superior Court (or cases tried in provincial courts after a preliminary inquiry). [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 1:44 pm
In 2016, Jordan set stricter boundaries and presumptive ceilings – namely 18 months in provincial courts from charge to the end of trial and 30 months for Superior Court (or cases tried in provincial courts after a preliminary inquiry). [read post]
4 Dec 2008, 2:00 pm
Pritchard suggested that corporate shareholders propose a fix for what he considers flaws in the Supreme Court's Basic v. [read post]
26 Jan 2024, 10:49 am
See Fox v. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 1:26 pm
Hydro-Blok USA LLC v. [read post]
10 Sep 2017, 9:01 pm
Superior Court, which the California Supreme Court decided in 1998. [read post]
29 Dec 2019, 12:07 pm
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently released a decision in Eisenberg v. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 1:27 pm
Dyson, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 9:58 am
Mazza v. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 11:27 am
LITIGATION Two More Vanilla Cases Get Thrown Out of the Food Court In Robie v. [read post]
24 Nov 2022, 9:07 am
The value of a publicly listed company can be determined at any given moment based on the traded price of the stock. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 4:07 am
Lawyers for MGN told the court the company has “paid a very heavy price” for the hacking scandal, while advocates for Prince Harry argued he was entitled to £320,000 in aggravated damages. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 4:39 pm
The California Supreme Court reached a sensible decision in Silverbrand v. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 11:22 am
Supreme Court held in Twombly v. [read post]
