Search for: "STANFORD v. STATE" Results 101 - 120 of 2,149
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jun 2023, 5:25 am by Kevin LaCroix
Frankel quotes Stanford Law School Professor Joseph Grundfest as saying that there “is no such thing” as a federal derivative action under Section 14(a). [read post]
14 Jun 2023, 6:30 am by Sandy Levinson
  I first became aware of this in a brilliant essay by Stanford historian Jonathan Gnienapp that was published in a book that I edited on nullification and secession in contemporary constitutional theory. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 3:30 am by Liz Dunshee
Stated differently, these derivative suits concern internal corporate affairs—matters that are traditionally governed by state corporate law and, therefore, more sensibly litigated in the Delaware Chancery. [read post]
Here, Professor Buzz Thompson, a global expert on water and natural resources who has served as Special Master for the United States Supreme Court in Montana v. [read post]
22 May 2023, 11:52 am by Avery Schmitz
ET: The Atlantic Council will host a fireside chat with the European Commissioner for Transport Adina Vӑlean. [read post]
12 May 2023, 8:55 am by Lawrence Solum
Brett Parker (Stanford University - Department of Political Science) has posted Polarization in State Supreme Courts, 1980-2020 on SSRN. [read post]
4 May 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
Among the most authoritative sources cherry-picked by the AGs is a well-regarded Stanford Law Review article by Schanzenbach and Sitkoff.[6] As the Kentucky AG notes when citing this piece of scholarship, “ESG investing is an ‘umbrella term that refers to an investment strategy that emphasizes a firm’s governance structure or the environmental or social impacts of the firm’s products or practices. [read post]
4 May 2023, 4:00 am by Eric Segall
 By Eric SegallTwenty years ago, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote the following in Grutter v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 10:26 am by Neil H. Buchanan
  During an oral argument at the Supreme Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch initiated this bizarre exchange, as reported in Slate:During oral arguments in 303 Creative v. [read post]
Yes, constitutional law has been used to oppress Native people, but at the same time, we want to bring to the fore how Native arguments led, for example, to seminal cases such as Worcester v. [read post]