Search for: "Sales v. State" Results 1281 - 1300 of 19,294
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Mar 2009, 5:23 am
At Monday's oral argument in Yeager v. [read post]
25 May 2009, 4:24 am
Wallace, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent.U.S. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2011, 8:45 pm by Staff
DISMISSED AT TRIAL – Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia, State v. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 4:20 am
Allstate Insurance Company, Defendants (Memorandum and Order, United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York) Goldman Sachs gets $3M FINRA fine for 60 million short sale errors (Financial Planning by Victoria Zhuang) Latest SEC budget request emphasizes an enforcement agenda (Financial Planning by Dan Shaw) ... [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 4:20 am
In 2023 FINRA Settles With Goldman Sachs Over Mismarked Short Sales Dating Back to 2015 (BrokeAndBroker.com Blog) FINRA Arbitration Award Gives Us A Case of Gas From Chipotle Bean Burrito Puts (BrokeAndBroker.com Blog) Steven Schwartz, Plaintiff, v. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 12:49 am
Tenth Circuit concludes, in fraud case involving the sale of aircraft parts, cross-examination of character witnesses did not include impermissible guilt-assuming hypothetical questions based on the charges, but any error was harmless based on overwhelming evidence of guilt, in United States v. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 12:08 pm
” The decision provides important clarification on the standard laid out by the United States Supreme Court in Morrison v. [read post]
31 May 2021, 7:51 pm by Peter Mahler
The New York Court of Appeals’ 2012 opinion in Pappas v Tzolis, decided in the wake and spirit of that court’s rulings the year before in the Centro Empresarial v America Movil and Arfa v Zamir cases, raised the bar for claims of fraud and breach of fiduciary duty brought by non-controlling shareholders and LLC members in connection with buyout transactions. [read post]
3 Apr 2013, 7:07 pm
The Court was asked to review Ninestar Technology Co. v United States International Trade Commission, to determine whether the first sale doctrine would apply to products protected by patents similarly to the way in which Kirtsaeng applied it to copyright products. [read post]
Cir. 2007), the Federal Circuit held that US patent rights are only exhausted through a first sale “in the United States. [read post]
15 Dec 2006, 1:56 pm
(The stay application is Stroup, et al., v. [read post]