Search for: "Owings v. Respondent" Results 1061 - 1080 of 2,317
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Apr 2016, 1:03 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
On Wednesday it will heard the appeal of Vendort Traders Inc v Evrostroy Group LLC (British Virgin Islands) concerning a statutory demand served on the appellant in May 2012 for payment of a debt owed under a 2006 share sale and purchase agreement with the respondent. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 3:24 am by Peter Mahler
” Becker responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds, among others, that the Hoeys lack standing to seek a partition of the properties owned by the two LLCs; that the assignment by Thomas to Wendy is invalid under the anti-assignment provisions in Article 10 of the mirror-image operating agreements of the two companies governing transfer of membership interests; and, even assuming the assignment made Wendy the mere transferee of an economic interest, that… [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 3:24 am by Peter Mahler
” Becker responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds, among others, that the Hoeys lack standing to seek a partition of the properties owned by the two LLCs; that the assignment by Thomas to Wendy is invalid under the anti-assignment provisions in Article 10 of the mirror-image operating agreements of the two companies governing transfer of membership interests; and, even assuming the assignment made Wendy the mere transferee of an economic interest, that… [read post]
7 Apr 2016, 11:36 pm by Ben Reeve-Lewis
Flashing his famous ‘V’ sign he said “We can take it”…to which she responded “You aint F***ing taking it mister, we are”. [read post]
21 Mar 2016, 6:49 am by Joy Waltemath
When she confronted him, he responded that she no longer deserved the move owing to the “inconveniency of [her] pregnancy. [read post]
12 Mar 2016, 8:23 am by Geoffrey
  Whoever invokes the Arbitration Agreement is by custom the Claimant; the Party who responds and may make a Counterclaim is called the Respondent. [read post]
12 Mar 2016, 7:48 am by Associates and Bruce L. Scheiner
Insurer didn’t respond within 30 days, so the proposal was deemed rejected by the court. [read post]
6 Mar 2016, 7:26 am by Giles Peaker
The respondent, by Mr Hartley, says that it did because it was dangerous. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 8:25 pm by Amy Howe
  Specifically, the dispute arose from petitioner Husky’s efforts to recover from respondent Daniel Ritz a debt of just under $164,000 owed to it for electronic device components that it supplied to the now-defunct Chrysalis Manufacturing Corp., which Ritz controlled and partly owned. [read post]