Search for: "Case v. Bank" Results 141 - 160 of 18,620
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Apr 2020, 9:26 pm by Patent Docs
By Joshua Rich -- Less than two years ago, in Return Mail, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 7:46 am by Karen Brady
Some other estate planning attorneys, including North Carolina Estate Planning Blog, brought the case of Smith v. [read post]
27 Oct 2008, 11:00 am
Yorkshire Bank Finance Ltd v Mulhall and Another: [2008] EWCA Civ 1156; [2008] WLR (D) 330 “No provision in the Limitation Act 1980 prevented the enforcement in 2007 of a charging order over land made in 1990 to secure a judgment debt though no attempt at enforcement had been made in the interim. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 2:10 am by sally
Mond and another v MBNA Europe Bank Ltd [2010] EWHC 1710 (Ch); [2010] WLR (D) 190 “Clause 13.2 of the IVA Protocol, as well as clause 13.1, should not be construed as permitting a creditor bound by the Protocol to vote against an individual voluntary arrangement (‘IVA’) proposal only if he has good reason to do so. [read post]
10 Dec 2010, 2:18 am by traceydennis
Barclays Bank plc v Guy [2010] EWCA Civ 1396; [2010] WLR (D) 321 “Where an application was made to reopen a refusal of permission to appeal by the Court of Appeal, the criteria to be applied should be the same as where application was made, pursuant to CPR r 52.17(1), to reopen a final judgment reached after a full trial. [read post]
10 May 2012, 10:09 pm by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Okla.): Complaint Memorandum in Support of Motion for TRO Order denying TRO Here are materials in a pending parallel state court case, First Bank and Trust Co. v. [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 1:30 am by Seth
Tex., Marshall Division) to defend a patent infringement case (the [...] [read post]
16 Jul 2009, 2:58 am
Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd and another v Baskan Gida Sanayi Ve Pazarlama AS and others  [2009] EWHC 1696 (Ch); [2009] WLR (D) 242 “There was no general principle that where an otherwise successful party had put forward a dishonest case in relation to an issue in the litigation, the general rule in CPR r 44.3(2)(a) that [...] [read post]
1 Apr 2015, 6:11 am
Such a requirement was not satisfied since, in this case, Shaw intended his principal target to have been the bank's customer, Hsu.U.S. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2016, 7:42 am by Jaclyn Belczyk
The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] unanimously Monday in Shaw v. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 9:57 am by Steven G. Pearl
Bank of America (November 18, 2010) --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2010 WL 4643834.Maybe I should not have been so surprised that the Court decided to review the case. [read post]