Search for: "Frank Moskowitz" Results 1 - 12 of 12
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2009, 7:10 am
Some of the firms adversely impacted apparently include Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker (750-plus lawyers), Cooley Godward Kronish (600-plus), Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson (675), Latham & Watkins (2300-plus) and Simpson Thatcher & Bartlett (860-plus). [read post]
11 Apr 2019, 4:20 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Hyland, Tina [*2]Zerilli, and Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, LLP (hereinafter collectively the Wilson Elser defendants), who had represented Expedient in the claim denial action, and against Frank Haupel, Michael Schwarz, and DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP (hereinafter collectively the DelBello defendants), who had represented First American in the claim denial action. [read post]
16 Aug 2018, 4:59 am by SHG
[Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Frank] Moskowitz agreed. [read post]
15 May 2007, 1:57 pm
Since the article is evidently doing it by lawyer headcount, I took the most recent National Law Journal 250 (ranking firms by headcount as opposed to revenue, as the AmLaw 200 are ranked), sorted on "Headquarters City" (a self-reported datum), and came up with this, where the first column is the firm's NLJ 250 rank and the last column is their reported lawyer headcounts: 4 White & Case,… [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 10:09 am by The Public Employment Law Press
He was Vice Chair of the New York State Democratic Party, Senior Advisor to the Mario Cuomo reelection campaign (1990), and Deputy Campaign Manager for Barney Frank's initial run for Congress (1980). [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 9:57 am by Wolfgang Demino
The author urges that the other circuits follow the Second Circuit in Madden v Midland because the Dodd-Frank was not made retroactive and therefore provides no relief against predatory lending abuses that occurred prior to the law's effectiveness date.Madden v. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 9:57 am by Wolfgang Demino
The author urges that the other circuits follow the Second Circuit in Madden v Midland because the Dodd-Frank was not made retroactive and therefore provides no relief against predatory lending abuses that occurred prior to the law's effectiveness date. [read post]