Search for: "Exxon Corporation, Appeal of"
Results 81 - 100
of 181
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Mar 2012, 2:10 pm
The trial court ruled against him, and he appealed. [read post]
3 May 2018, 3:46 pm
Robert Schaffer, the administrative judge of the Harris County District Courts, and HBA President Alistair Dawson presented the following awards: Large Firm—Baker Botts; Mid-size Firm—Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld; Small Firm—Berg & Androphy; Corporation—Exxon Mobil Corporation Law Department; Individual—Mike Day, of the Trey Yates Law Firm; and President’s Pro Bono Star—solo practitioner Steven C. [read post]
20 Feb 2007, 7:35 am
She's not sanguine about Exxon-Mobil deciding her fate; at least she has a vote and a stake in the government. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 11:06 pm
Exxon Mobil Corp (see here). [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 5:33 pm
For his part, Judge Noonan dissented, viewing the trial judge as better suited than the court of appeals for determining the appropriate punitive damages amount. [read post]
1 Feb 2007, 5:32 am
Whether the district court correctly concluded that neither production taxes nor royalties are "direct costs of producing" in the proportionate profits formula set forth in § 39-14-203(b)(vi)(D) of the Wyoming Statutes.Facts: The Department of Revenue appeals a declaratory judgment in favor of Exxon Mobil Corporation. [read post]
21 Jan 2009, 5:27 am
The $11.8-billion punitive part of the Exxon verdict was erased in post-trial appeals, and Alabama wound up with about $120 million. [read post]
7 Mar 2009, 4:53 am
Mar. 27, 2009) (Opinion by Dale Wainright) (oil and gas law, statutory construction, cause of action for improperly plugging oil well, no standing of subsequent lessee)EXXON CORPORATION AND EXXON TEXAS, INC. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 3:00 am
LLC),[5] and the other in the District of Columbia Circuit (see Judge Rogers in Doe v Exxon).[6] Both of these opinions support corporate liability under the ATS and likewise reflect the reasoning of Murray, Kinley and Pitts that the rumours of the death of corporate liability under the ATS are greatly exaggerated. [read post]
13 Jun 2018, 2:04 pm
Exxon Mobil Corp., 654 F. 3d 11, 40–55 (CADC 2011), vacated on other grounds, 527 Fed. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 4:30 am
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that corporate officers did not personally agree to arbitrate and were not bound by an arbitration agreement. [read post]
20 May 2009, 2:57 pm
App. 4 Cir. 3/31/09), the Fourth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s denial of class certification against the defendants, Exxon Mobil Corporation and Chalmette Refining, L.L.C. [read post]
20 May 2009, 2:57 pm
App. 4 Cir. 3/31/09), the Fourth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s denial of class certification against the defendants, Exxon Mobil Corporation and Chalmette Refining, L.L.C. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 11:12 am
Chevron Corporation et al., Docket No. 18-15499, the Ninth Circuit held that 28 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Feb 2013, 7:32 am
For example, at Exxon Corporate Research in the 1980's, there was much discussion concerning a 40 Angstrom structure in petroleum asphaltenes (for Cu Kalpha radiation, a feature at 2 degrees, hence the "2 degree band.") [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 7:29 am
As to lawsuits involving oil companies and synfuels, LBE remembers a famous case involving Exxon and the US government, wherein former Corporate Research scientist Rocco Fiato testified. [read post]
18 Feb 2012, 5:25 am
He lost, but the Court of Appeals reversed.The court found that the provisions concerning forfeiture were unenforceable under Texas law. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 4:09 pm
Nov. 20, 2009)(per curiam)(class action suits)(trial court’s class certification order in suit brought by gas station dealers over pricing and rebates is vacated and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings)EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 2:34 pm
Exxon paid just over $4.3 billion for the damage caused by Exxon Valdez. [read post]
15 Aug 2022, 7:33 am
The city filed its complaint in state court in July of 2018; the companies removed the case to the Maryland federal district court; the federal court remanded the case to state court; the companies appealed; the Fourth Circuit affirmed the decision; the companies appealed to the U.S. [read post]
