Search for: "PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY v. CORPORATION COMMISSION"
Results 81 - 100
of 1,183
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2023, 9:01 pm
Kiger v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 12:50 pm
In Dobbs, the Supreme Court reversed its previous 1973 Roe v. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 9:08 am
As it stands today, however, California businesses that are open to the public are still obligated to offer their goods and services in a non-discriminatory manner that comp [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 4:07 am
On 27 June 2023 the House of Lords approved an amendment to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill which aims to tackle “strategic litigation against public participation” (“SLAPPs”); the use of defamation law to silence critics. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 1:17 am
In fact, there isn't even evidence for hold-up affecting large corporations. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 9:29 am
Even if Smith believes God is calling her to do so through her for-profit company, the company need not hold out its goods or services to the public at large. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 8:20 am
In Hurley v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 5:48 am
“others doing the Commission’s job for it? [read post]
23 Jun 2023, 3:11 am
From a UK perspective, this would align with the proposed EU-US Data Privacy Framework currently being assessed by the European Commission. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 9:28 am
The phase-out will begin in the 2025 CFT year (which is the 2024 income tax year) and the CFT will be reduced by 25% for each year in which overall corporate tax collections (from the CFT and the Corporation Income Tax) exceed $600 million. [read post]
24 May 2023, 6:37 am
To conceal the hush money payment, it was agreed that Cohen would make the payment to Daniels via a shell company (Essential Consultants), on the agreement that Trump would later reimburse Cohen. [read post]
17 May 2023, 6:20 am
The offence applies to all large companies and partnerships, large not-for-profit organisations (such as charities) and public bodies incorporated in the UK. [read post]
11 May 2023, 11:29 am
For example, in United States v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 9:26 am
For example, in United States v. [read post]
9 May 2023, 9:01 pm
There is reason to believe the SEC’s new universal proxy Rule 14a-19 will result in more stockholder nominees being elected to the boards of public companies. [read post]
7 May 2023, 12:52 am
If there is any company whose business the DG GROW initiative is really designed to grow, it's neither an innovator nor an implementer of standards (neither side likes the proposal): it's just IPlytics, a service provider. [read post]
24 Apr 2023, 12:50 pm
In support, the Second Circuit cites a "diversity, equity, and inclusion" consultant who charges companies for "consulting packages" to implement "corporate social responsibility" programs, as well as a "survey" commissioned by a marketing company that "strives to insert the brand's social mission and innovations into mainstream conversations through traditional and social media. [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 7:16 pm
The board shall not make an investment decision with the primary purpose of influencing any social or environmental policy or attempting to influence the governance of any corporation. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 12:28 am
The first public filing submitted by (not only, but also) Mrs. [read post]
16 Apr 2023, 2:56 am
Item (f) about claim charts should be left to the way the courts apply Huawei v. [read post]
