Search for: "SELLERS v. STATE"
Results 921 - 940
of 3,988
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jun 2019, 1:19 am
Robbie v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 2:50 pm
Here is the provision:Fair and equitable66.501 The Board shall fix royalty and levy rates and any related terms and conditions under this Act that are fair and equitable, in consideration of(a) what would have been agreed upon between a willing buyer and a willing seller acting in a competitive market with all relevant information, at arm’s length and free of external constraints;(b) the public interest;(c) any regulation made under subsection 66.91(1);… [read post]
18 Jun 2019, 6:42 am
In KT4 Partners LLC v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 12:48 pm
In United States v. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 8:27 am
Graham v. [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 7:00 am
Most states have modeled their law after the South Dakota law analyzed in South Dakota v. [read post]
11 Jun 2019, 5:02 am
We cite Rumsfeld v. [read post]
6 Jun 2019, 3:00 am
Wayfair – which permitted states to impose sales tax liability on out-of-state sellers – has changed M&A due diligence. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 11:25 am
In Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 11:25 am
In Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 11:25 am
In Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 10:16 am
Sorrell v. [read post]
31 May 2019, 5:30 pm
Love Field.The Supreme Court is now considering whether it wants to review Love Terminal Partners v. [read post]
28 May 2019, 1:27 pm
Drivers Headquarters, LP v. [read post]
28 May 2019, 4:07 am
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
23 May 2019, 6:34 am
However, in South Dakota v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 8:27 am
Whether a remote seller has economic factor presence nexus in a state is based on the seller’s sales revenue or transaction volume in the state, or a combination of both. [read post]
20 May 2019, 9:18 am
”[8] This pervasiveness of knowledge about the potential hazards of industrial silica exposure has been the basis for many dispositive rulings in silica cases, even when the sellers lacked subjective awareness of the buyer’s state of mind.[9] Product liability is defined and bounded by the scope of an essential need for warnings in the face of imbalances in knowledge between seller and buyer. [read post]
13 May 2019, 4:41 am
With respect to due process, “[a] non-domiciliary tortfeasor has minimum contacts with the forum State . . . if it purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State” (LaMarca, 95 NY2d at 216 [internal quotations marks and citations omitted]),“thus invoking the benefits and protections of [the forum state’s] laws” (Hanson v Denckla, 357 US 235, 253 [1958]). [read post]
13 May 2019, 4:12 am
The seller set up a situation in which both houses had the parking, but it all got screwed up. [read post]
