Search for: "Andersen v. United States" Results 61 - 80 of 170
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Mar 2009, 9:00 am
” Comcast argued that the memoranda fell within the “derivative privilege” recognized in United States v. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 4:01 pm by Larry Ribstein
See Arthur Andersen LLP v.United States, 544 U.S. 696, 705-08 (2005); United States v. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 6:27 am by Russell Beck
Arthur Andersen LLP, closing a loophole that had been opened and expanded by the United States District Courts in California, which had allowed the enforcement of noncompetes in certain circumstances. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 5:26 pm
Serving as Chief Justice of the United States was Duke Law School Dean, and former Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, David F. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 11:25 am by James Bickford
Louis Dispatch, and the Columbia (MO) Daily Tribune all report on a case that has been dropped as a result of last week’s ruling in United States v. [read post]
11 Jul 2024, 9:05 pm by renholding
United States rejected a broad application of certain Enron-era obstruction of justice laws, it reaffirmed the original corporate responsibility focus of those laws. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 10:00 pm
Pioneer Hi-Bred Int'l before the United States Supreme Court. [read post]
19 Jul 2018, 10:59 am by Kish Law
 As a respected Senior Judge in New York wrote in the opening lines of his decision in United States v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 10:29 am by Ronald Mann
The treaty obligates the United States and about 160 other signatories to enforce arbitration agreements between businesses of member states. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 2:20 pm by Kenneth J. Vanko
The covenant itself must only prohibit competitive activity requiring the use of trade secrets. -- Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of California Opinion Date: 7/1/11 Cite: Richmond Technologies, Inc. v. [read post]
14 May 2014, 5:02 am
  The Court of Appeals begins its opinion by explaining that[t]his appeal arises from a lawsuit filed by [Fasteners for Retail] FFR in an unrelated matter in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. [read post]