Search for: "Bank Line v. United States" Results 301 - 320 of 1,503
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Nov 2020, 4:32 am by Stephen Sachs
The oral argument transcript in California v. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 2:18 pm by Kevin LaCroix
[vii] Compliance with Regulation D does not assure compliance with applicable state securities laws. [read post]
11 Nov 2020, 4:14 pm by Bona Law PC
Similarly, in September 2015, KYB, a Japanese company, agreed to plead guilty for its role in a conspiracy to fix the prices of shock absorbers installed in cars and motorcycles sold in the United States. [read post]
31 Oct 2020, 7:39 am by Russell Knight
Subpoenas from a United States’ divorce lawyer have little power overseas. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 7:06 am by Kristian Soltes
“Unlike some jurisdictions, here in the United States we continue to see strong demand for cash,” he said during a panel on cross-border payments and digital currencies hosted Monday by the International Monetary Fund. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 8:00 am by ernst
Despite lots of its own inconsistency, the Supreme Court adopted this view in 1866 in United States v. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 4:32 am by Peter Mahler
For one of its corporate-titan residents named James Cayne, the former CEO of Bear Stearns, however, the shouting is more along the lines, “I’m being screwed by the co-op’s board! [read post]
30 Sep 2020, 9:05 pm by Herbert Hovenkamp
For example, in United States v. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 12:31 pm by Josh Blackman, Seth Barrett Tillman
” Section 201(a)(1) defines this category to include members of Congress, as well as “an officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf of the United States. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 5:01 am by Sean Quirk
” Since the July 12, 2016, arbitral tribunal ruling in Philippines v. [read post]
13 Aug 2020, 6:59 am by Kristian Soltes
Department of Justice and a contingent of state attorneys general challenged AmEx’s anti-steering rules in a case that reached the Supreme Court in 2018 as Ohio v. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
In addition to the temporal disconnect, the majority gave virtually no consideration to the three-way relationship between the product supplier defendants, the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs’ employer, the United States government. [read post]
8 Aug 2020, 12:55 am by INFORRM
Comparative human rights law Baldassi & Others in 2020 reaches the same conclusion as the Supreme Court of the United States in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. [read post]
7 Aug 2020, 7:47 pm
  OEIGWG CHAIRMANSHIP SECOND REVISED DRAFT 06.08.2020 LEGALLY BINDING INSTRUMENT TO REGULATE, IN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW, THE ACTIVITIES OF TRANSNATIONAL CORPORATIONS AND OTHER BUSINESS ENTERPRISES Preamble The State Parties to this (Legally Binding Instrument),Reaffirming the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations; Recalling the nine core International Human Rights Instruments adopted by the United Nations, and the eight… [read post]