Search for: "ANDERSON v. CORPORATION COMMISSION"
Results 81 - 100
of 121
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Oct 2011, 12:49 pm
Guest speakers include: David Powers, Nancy Kim, Shirley Anderson and many other individuals. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 3:38 am
Surveillance Privacy International submitted a written response to Lord David Anderson’s call for comments relating to his review of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 8:56 pm
Issue: Whether an Arizona commission violated the free speech rights of an anti-abortion organization by denying its application for a specialty “Choose Life” license plate. [read post]
18 Feb 2012, 5:15 am
Such funds are covered by the Securities Exchange Act (1934 Act) and are required to file disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), just like other publicly traded companies. [read post]
3 Feb 2008, 10:20 pm
By doing so, SOX specifically addresses conflicts that arise when one professional entity performs work for a client but also owes fiduciary duties to the investing public and company shareholders. [28] SOX intimidated KPMG into disbanding their global legal entity, KLegal, which employed mover than 3,000 lawyers in 60 countries. [29] However, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Deloitte & Touche, and Ernst & Young have no intentions of doing the same, despite added… [read post]
1 Oct 2011, 4:38 am
Francis Xavier v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 7:33 pm
Furthermore, the many inconsistencies in commission decisions have made it impossible for the phrase to acquire a definite meaning in the process of regulation. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 2:13 pm
This is what is keeping the Federal Communications Commission,[6] the Federal Trade Commission,[7] some in Congress,[8] and many media worrywarts up at night: the fear that, as traditional financing mechanisms falter (advertising, classifieds, subscription revenues, etc.), many traditional news-gathering efforts and institutions will disappear. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:26 am
Co. v. [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 6:01 am
Further discussion of the desirability (or otherwise) of abolishing appeals to the Privy Council arose: in 1978 in the Report of the Royal Commission on the Courts; in 1989 in a Law Commission Paper on the Structure of the Courts; in 1995 in a report by the Solicitor General to the Cabinet Strategy Committee on court structures; in a Discussion Paper called “Reshaping New Zealand’s Appeal Structure” issued in 2000 by the Attorney General; and in an Advisory Group… [read post]
2 May 2008, 7:00 am
Landmark IP implications for universities: University of Western Australia v Gray: (IPRoo), (Managing Intellectual Property), (The Age), The latest edition of US Trade Representative’s ‘Special 301 Report’: (Ars Technica), (Ars Technica), (IAM), (Intellectual Property Watch), (Patry Copyright Blog), (Managing Intellectual Property), (Patent Docs), (IP Law360), Court rejects RIAA ‘making available’ theory: Atlantic v Howell:… [read post]
20 Jan 2023, 5:16 am
And in the Flatow case, known as Flatow v. [read post]
21 Feb 2019, 4:00 am
Court of Appeal’s ruling in R. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 1:09 pm
Co. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 3:00 am
Lobbyists’ Revolving Door Leads Back to Capitol Hill Jobs Bloomberg Government – Megan Wilson | Published: 11/5/2019 More than 100 staff members traded in jobs with high-paying K Street firms, corporations, trade associations, or nonprofits for long hours on Capitol Hill beset by partisan brawls and legislative gridlock. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 1:19 pm
Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. [read post]
24 Sep 2023, 9:01 pm
As we discuss further in Section IV, SB 264 is also the subject of a constitutional and statutory challenge in the federal courts in the case of Shen v. [read post]
22 Apr 2019, 4:53 pm
The public statement references both a published framework of analysis by FinHub and a response to a no-action request by the Division of Corporation Finance. [read post]
3 Dec 2021, 9:49 am
; 7:21-cv-10179, Anderson v. [read post]
3 Dec 2021, 9:49 am
; 7:21-cv-10179, Anderson v. [read post]
