Search for: "MORRIS S. PHILLIPS'S CASE" Results 161 - 180 of 247
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Dec 2011, 1:19 pm by Adrian Lurssen
And so, from JD Supra, a year-end update of 2012 updates: Here's what lawyers and law firms have been writing about new laws for 2012. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 4:21 pm
Companies like Phillip Morris (cigarette manufacturer) Dow Chemical, Exxon, General Electric, AETNA, Geico, State Farm, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and Nationwide contribute between $50,000.00-75,000.00 per company to fund the diatribes against the court system put out by ATRA. [read post]
27 Mar 2009, 4:27 am
Ross Runkel's LawMemo details a case in which an employer snooped on an employee's private AOL email account that the employee accessed from a work computer. [read post]
20 Nov 2008, 1:31 am
The very same lobbyists who have already spent $58 million on lobbying this year…and that doesn’t even include the Altria Group (owner of cigarette manufacturer Phillip Morris) which surprise, surprise, has a major preemption case currently pending before the Bush-packed U.S. [read post]
1 May 2017, 11:36 am by Howard Knopf
Australia resisted an ISDS challenge of its tobacco plain packaging by Phillip Morris on technical jurisdictional grounds and prevailed. [read post]
1 May 2017, 11:36 am by Howard Knopf
Australia resisted an ISDS challenge of its tobacco plain packaging by Phillip Morris on technical jurisdictional grounds and prevailed. [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 11:00 am by Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
Meyer is scheduled to be sentenced in the criminal case on December 16. [read post]
26 Aug 2014, 3:15 pm by Amanda Traphagan
In 1996, the State of Texas sued the Big Four tobacco manufacturers – Phillip Morris, R.J. [read post]
4 Oct 2016, 4:24 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Phillip Morris Inc., 621 N.W.2d 2 (Minn. 2001) (“[T]o state a claim that any of the substantive [consumer protection] statutes has been violated, the plaintiff need only plead that the defendant engaged in conduct prohibited by the statutes and that the plaintiff was damaged thereby. [read post]