Search for: "Larkins v. Larkins"
Results 121 - 140
of 307
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Mar 2017, 10:23 am
I rarely blog about draft bills that have not yet been introduced. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 6:28 am
Larkin, of the firm Hunton & Williams LLP. [read post]
31 Jan 2017, 8:00 am
Larkin v. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 2:00 am
John Larkin v. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 2:00 am
John Larkin v. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 3:39 pm
Obeid v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 9:51 am
[cites to Doe v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 1:45 am
Lord Pannick QC says it is no answer for the Government to say that the long title to the 1972 Act “says nothing about withdrawal“. 16:04: Lord Pannick QC refers to the case of Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, which he submits supports a “flexible response” to constitutional developments. [read post]
26 Oct 2016, 11:04 am
, Perry v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 6:05 am
Corporate Governance Code Posted by Gary Larkin, The Conference Board, on Tuesday, October 11, 2016 Tags: Board composition, Board dynamics, Board turnover, Boards of Directors, Commonsense Principles, Diversity,Engagement, Institutional Investors, Management, Pension funds, Proxy advisors, Proxy voting, Shareholder voting Optimal Fee-Shifting Bylaws Posted by Albert H. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 3:14 am
He was the author of the INTA amicus curiae brief to the United States Supreme Court in Qualitex Co. v. [read post]
12 Sep 2016, 8:00 pm
Larkin v. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 6:57 am
Comstock (Aug. 24, 2016) and Larkin v. [read post]
6 Sep 2016, 3:00 am
As this Morris James blog explains: Larkin v. [read post]
2 Sep 2016, 1:57 pm
(“Comstock”), and Larkin v. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 9:00 am
Larkin v Shah, C.A. 10918-VCS (August 25, 2016) This is one of two recent Court of Chancery decisions explaining that the Corwin case really does mean that there is an “irrebuttable business judgment rule” that bars challenges to a merger approved by a majority of the fully-informed, disinterested and uncoerced stockholders, in the absence of the deal involving a controlling stockholder who suffers from a conflict in the merger. [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:02 pm
WINN v. [read post]
12 Apr 2016, 9:25 am
Olmer v. [read post]
2 Apr 2016, 2:48 pm
Larkin v. [read post]
2 Apr 2016, 2:48 pm
Larkin v. [read post]
