Search for: "Burford v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 77
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Nov 2023, 10:27 am
We have been told by many that the $2.2 billion Intel v. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 1:07 pm
As a point of context, it’s worth noting that many states already require disclosure or much more draconian regulation of litigation funders backing state court cases—for instance, some states require funds and funders to register, and some even require funding agreements to be disclosed with the state. [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 3:34 am
And even when diversity exists, courts in most if not all eleven federal Circuits routinely abstain from hearing judicial dissolution claims under the Burford abstention doctrine. [read post]
27 Dec 2021, 12:37 am
Court of Appeals in Friedman v Revenue Management, Inc. employed the Burford abstention doctrine to close the courthouse door to judicial dissolution proceedings even where diversity jurisdiction is present. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 3:10 am
Even when there is diverse citizenship, if the suit is one for judicial dissolution, some federal courts including those in New York will dismiss the case under the Burford abstention doctrine, thereby forcing it to be re-filed in state court. [read post]
24 May 2021, 3:56 am
Common-Law Dissolution Plaintiff Loses Fight Over Venue Last year I wrote about a federal court’s first-impression decision in Busher v Barry in which it applied the Burford abstention doctrine to dismiss, without prejudice to refiling in state court, the minority shareholders’ claim for common-law dissolution. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 4:19 am
The doctrine is named after Burford v Sun Oil Co., a 1943 decision in which the U.S. [read post]
5 Mar 2021, 12:30 pm
On this episode, plaintiffs from the landmark case of Monroe v. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 7:12 am
Grace Ranch, LLC v. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 7:12 am
Grace Ranch, LLC v. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 4:47 am
In most instances, the federal courts have abstained from hearing those cases under the prong of Burford abstention deferring to state efforts to establish a uniform development and interpretation of the statutory scheme governing state-created entities. [read post]
13 Jan 2020, 4:06 am
Busher v Barry The question of first impression was addressed by S.D.N.Y. [read post]
21 Oct 2019, 12:14 am
Some but not all federal courts have applied Burford abstention to dismiss the case without prejudice to re-filing in state court, in deference to state court primacy in an area of comprehensive state regulation. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 5:19 am
Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971); Burford v. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 3:40 am
” With that statement, in Paddison v Paddison, Civil Action No. 19-2109 [U.S. [read post]
8 Feb 2019, 6:04 am
McIntosh, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, on Thursday, February 7, 2019 Tags: Accounting, Accounting standards, Board oversight, Boards of Directors, Compliance and disclosure interpretation, Financial reporting, GAAP, SEC, SEC enforcement, Securities enforcement, Securities regulation Amicus Brief of Law and Finance Professors in Verition Partners v. [read post]
13 Aug 2018, 3:26 am
” The decision does not mention Burford abstention or otherwise indicate if the defendants argued Burford abstention as an alternative basis for dismissal. [read post]
29 Jul 2018, 5:26 pm
County of Charleston v Finish Line Foundation II, Inc. 2018 WL 3303197 (D. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 4:09 pm
Defendants first moved that the Court abstain from exercising jurisdiction over this case under Burford v. [read post]
25 Apr 2018, 3:39 am
A comparison of the number of amicus briefs filed shows where most of the attention was. 54 briefs in Oil States vs. only in SAS. [read post]
