Search for: "Davis v. Polk"
Results 81 - 100
of 272
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jul 2017, 6:04 am
Pastuszenski, Goodwin Procter LLP, on Tuesday, July 18, 2017 Tags: California, Class actions, Jurisdiction, New York, PSLRA, Securities Act, Securities litigation, Shareholder suits, SLUSA, State law, Supreme Court CalPERS v. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 6:38 am
Antitrust Laws As noted in this Davis Polk memo, the U.S. [read post]
4 Sep 2012, 2:47 am
" However, the documentary evidence demonstrated that the plaintiff's individual liability on the notes was a matter outside of the scope of the defendants' representation of the plaintiff in her capacity as co-executor of the estate (see CPLR 3211[a][1]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435; DeNatale v Santangelo, 65 AD3d 1006, 1007; Turner v Irving Finkelstein & Meirowitz, LLP, 61 AD3d 849, 850). [*2]" [read post]
23 Apr 2010, 3:10 am
" However, the documentary evidence demonstrated that the plaintiff's individual liability on the notes was a matter outside of the scope of the defendants' representation of the plaintiff in her capacity as co-executor of the estate (see CPLR 3211[a][1]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435; DeNatale v Santangelo, 65 AD3d 1006, 1007; Turner v Irving Finkelstein & Meirowitz, LLP, 61 AD3d 849, 850). [*2]" [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 2:57 am
" However, the documentary evidence demonstrated that the plaintiff's individual liability on the notes was a matter outside of the scope of the defendants' representation of the plaintiff in her capacity as co-executor of the estate (see CPLR 3211[a][1]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435; DeNatale v Santangelo, 65 AD3d 1006, 1007; Turner v Irving Finkelstein & Meirowitz, LLP, 61 AD3d 849, 850). [*2]" [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 3:01 pm
Davis Polk represents acquiror Technip S.A. and Vinson & Elkins represents target Global Industries, Ltd. in the just-announced $1.1 billion (enterprise value) undersea oil-services deal, according to the merger agreement. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 2:24 pm
Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836 [2007]; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438 [2007]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008 [1996]; Carmel v Lunney, 70 NY2d 169 [1987]). [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 3:43 am
Moreover, defendant failed to show that "but for" plaintiff's alleged negligence defendant would have obtained a more favorable result in the underlying landlord-tenant proceeding or would have successfully sold his business to a third-p[*2]arty (see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008 [1996]). [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 4:36 am
" (citations omitted)); Polk v. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 4:48 am
Webcast: “Underwriter’s Counsel: Latest Developments” Tune in tomorrow for the webcast – “Underwriter’s Counsel: Latest Developments” – during which White & Case’s Colin Diamond, Cravath’s LizAnn Eisen and Davis Polk’s Joe Hall will explore the latest developments that impact underwriter’s counsel, including negotiating the underwriting agreement, obtaining a comfort letter and making filings with FINRA. -… [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 3:59 am
AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428). [read post]
4 May 2010, 5:00 am
Fenrich of Davis Polk & Wardwell presented the defense position. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 7:34 am
Click here for the full Davis Polk publication. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 3:20 am
"As Aaron has failed to demonstrate that these materials are in any way material and necessary to proving a claim of legal malpractice (see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, [*3]8 NY3d 428, 434 [2007]) or to defending against PSGG's claims for counsel fees, the motion to compel must be denied (see CPLR 3101 [a]). [read post]
27 Jan 2021, 3:34 am
” “Plaintiff’s factual allegations fail to establish that but for defendants’ alleged negligence in not calling the cooperative’s attorney to testify in the Supreme Court action, the attorney’s testimony would have established that the unit was validly transferred to him at a July 1995 closing (see generally Ambase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 434 [2007]). [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 6:00 am
January 10th: SEC’s New Whistleblower Bounty Program - Richard Owens of Latham & Watkins and Linda Chatman Thomsen of Davis Polk & Wardwell will discuss the new regulation and how it may likely affect capital market participants, including the likely final provisions of the regulation, who will and who will not qualify for “whistleblower” status, what constitutes “original information,” the size of the “bounties” and much more.… [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 7:24 am
NIRI supports recommendations by Davis Polk and other commenters that the SEC should allow companies to create online business profiles for information that is unlikely to change from quarter to quarter, and provide annual updates. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 4:35 am
Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836 [2007]; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438 [2007]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008 [1996]; Carmel v Lunney, 70 NY2d 169 [1987]). [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 2:10 am
AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435-436 [2007]; Orchard Motorcycle Distribs., Inc. v Morrison Cohen Singer & Weinstein, LLP, 49 AD3d 292 [2008]). [read post]
4 Mar 2016, 6:00 am
Freed, Center for Political Accountability, on Friday, February 26, 2016 Tags: Accountability, Citizens United v. [read post]
