Search for: "Price v. Allen"
Results 141 - 160
of 314
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Feb 2014, 8:22 am
Hood v. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 6:33 am
Thus, in Miller v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 3:35 am
[Footnotes omitted] In the omitted footnotes, the opinion cites the above-mentioned Nixon v Blackwell and Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Nemec v Schrader in which it rejected a claim that directors of Booz Allen breached fiduciary duty by exercising redemption rights under an officers stock plan to redeem the shares of retired officers at a lower price in anticipation of a lucrative merger with the Carlyle Group. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 11:38 pm
They propose a “meaningful modification” of the Court’s holding in Basic, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 9:19 am
Hood v. [read post]
15 Nov 2013, 10:27 am
Riding with him as a passenger was a woman, Kelly Allen. [read post]
29 Oct 2013, 10:38 am
(Opinion by Allen, J.) [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 12:42 pm
However, the parties will have to await the decision in the Actavis v Sanofi reference before they can see what the future of their case looks like. [read post]
19 Sep 2013, 7:53 am
See, Silva v. [read post]
19 Sep 2013, 5:30 am
Sept. 13, 2013 Gantman, J., Allen, J., and Mundy, J.) [read post]
8 Sep 2013, 9:45 am
However he was permitted to proceed with certain other religion claims.In Allen v. [read post]
2 Sep 2013, 9:00 am
In SEC v. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 9:01 pm
In Alleyne v. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:16 am
State v. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 4:00 am
Allen v. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 7:56 am
(Opinion by Allen, J.) [read post]
12 Apr 2013, 7:32 am
This is “differentiation v integration”. [read post]
7 Apr 2013, 7:26 pm
He noted his advocacy for the side of innovators and wanting to protect people from de-incentivizing innovators in the course of negotiating to the lowest price. [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 4:59 pm
Choice, v.50, no. 06, February 2013. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 11:43 am
Troice, 12-88, all involving the preclusive effect of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act on state-law claims against entities that performed investment-related work for Allen Stanford’s Ponzi scheme. [read post]
