Search for: "American Express Co. v. Michigan" Results 21 - 40 of 176
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
At the very least, don’t the expressed views of five Justices that these powers are insufficient create something that is, as fellow Verdict columnist Mike Dorf put it in an amicus brief co-authored with Marty Lederman, “for all practical purposes precedential”? [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am by Bexis
  Indeed, precisely that scenario is how we ended up with Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 3:27 pm
Williams, we posted that the writing was clearly on the wall to the effect that punitive damages had "peaked out" in American law.That conclusion was strongly supported in the US Supreme Court's recent decision in the Exxon Valdez punitive damages case, Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 11:28 am
Dominos Pizza, Inc., 124 F.3d 430 (3rd Cir. 1997), and not uttering the “K” word (see Eastman Kodak Co. v. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 1:18 pm by Witzke Berry PLLC
With a clear expression of your wishes, there are unlikely to be any costly, time-consuming disputes over who gets what. [read post]
3 May 2007, 6:29 pm
" Compare Judge Rich's characterization of PHOSITA in Standard Oil Co. v. [read post]
1 Aug 2023, 8:04 pm
                          The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:13 pm by admin
Alan is the past Chair of the Michigan Real Property Section Condemnation Law Committee, American Bar Association Real Property Section Condemnation Committee. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 11:22 pm
Apr. 2, 2008) (Michigan statute); Alfred v. [read post]