Search for: "Appeal of the Austin Company" Results 101 - 120 of 942
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Aug 2015, 10:49 pm by Bill Marler
Now the National Association of Manufacturers, which has told the appeals court it “has a substantial interest in ensuring that executives at companies that are members of NAM are not subject to prison sentences,” is arguing that the DeCosters shouldn’t go to jail, even for one day. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 2:38 pm by Mark S. Humphreys
This is the situation in a 2005, Austin Court of Appeals opinion styled, McMillin v. [read post]
14 Jul 2007, 6:35 am
A profile of Sidley Austin attorney Virginia A. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 1:57 pm by News Desk
Circuit Court of Appeals, which Bennett indicated Monday he expected them to do. [read post]
27 Nov 2023, 5:48 pm by Francesca Blackard
In 2016 when the decree was finalized, the father worked for a company with offices in Harris and Dallas Counties, but he started another job in Austin six months later. [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 2:06 pm
Stratfor provides intelligence and analysis to corporate and government subscribers and is based in Austin, Texas. [read post]
13 Jul 2016, 8:21 am by Jonathan Marx
Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit upheld a three-month jail sentence against Austin “Jack” DeCoster and his son Peter, the CEO and COO respectively of Quality Egg LLC. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 1:27 pm by Mark S. Humphreys
The case was decided by the Austin Court of Appeals, and was an appeal from a judgment affirming an order of the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI). [read post]
7 May 2019, 2:54 am by Kevin LaCroix
In another recent report, the Sidley Austin law firm has taken a detailed look at important securities litigation developments in 2018 relating to life sciences companies. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 7:59 am by Russell Cawyer
 Attorneys representing companies typically want to utilize the “fluctuating workweek” method of calculating overtime. [read post]
26 Mar 2009, 12:32 pm
The court of appeals affirmed the dismissal on the grounds that the plaintiffs had waived their grounds of appeal because they appealed only the special exceptions order and not the dismissal order. [read post]