Search for: "LARGE v. LARGE" Results 1921 - 1940 of 40,605
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Apr 2016, 7:21 am by John Jascob
The high court discouraged the use of "Pearl Harbor-like" plans by board factions to disenfranchise other directors and chided the chancery court for labeling large stockholders as "super directors" (OptimisCorp v. [read post]
22 Aug 2023, 8:21 am by Christine Corcos
The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. [read post]
14 Dec 2021, 1:30 pm by Mukund Rathi
In October, EFF filed an amicus brief against HB 20 in Netchoice v. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 12:48 pm by Steve Vladeck
Most media reports and early commentary on Monday’s Supreme Court decision in Holland v. [read post]
13 May 2008, 1:19 pm
Just when, post Kay v Lambeth in the Lords, it looked like the issue of human rights defences to possession claims was pretty much settled (i.e. there pretty much weren’t any), the ECtHR has decided to put a large stick in the spokes. [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 2:00 am by James Johnson
Today, the Supreme Court will hear the case of Thevarajah v Riordan and Ors. [read post]
18 Dec 2020, 9:41 am
 For Wall Street's Big Boys, however, the letter and the number of the Law is often of no consequence; and when it is or should be, well, you know how things work: The industry's behemoths hire a large law firm, that law firm submits a letter seeking a waiver/exemption, that letter is often drafted by a former regulator, and, lo and behold, Eurkea!!! [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 7:43 am by Ashwin Varma
Specifically, over a period of about 20 years, the biopharmaceutical R&D model shifted from one in which established large pharmaceutical companies conducted every step in the drug-development value chain to one in which large firms have “outsourced” earlier steps in the R&D chain and concentrated their activities on running the large “Phase 3” trials that are needed to indisputably prove a drug’s efficacy. [read post]