Search for: "Hagan v State" Results 1 - 20 of 165
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2010, 10:02 am by James Hamilton
However, Senator Hagan noted that 619(f) does not limit in any manner transactions and normal banking relationships with a fund not controlled by the banking entity or a fund sponsored by the banking entity.Section 619(d)(4)(I) permits certain banking entities to operate hedge and private equity funds outside of the United States provided that no ownership interest in any hedge or private equity fund is offered for sale or sold to a U.S. resident. [read post]
8 Jan 2012, 10:42 am by PaulKostro
Div., A-3476-10T2, December 30, 2011: Our State’s strong public policy favors arbitration, an alternative means of dispute resolution, EPIX Holdings Corp. v. [read post]
8 Mar 2013, 9:58 am by Ernest E. Badway
  This case is of particular interest to securities litigators because it is one of several cases since the landmark Supreme Court case of United States v. [read post]
6 Oct 2021, 11:34 am by Eugene Volokh
[Miller had asked the court to issue a temporary restraining order; no, said Judge Emily Hagan (Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas).] [read post]
23 Oct 2011, 8:36 pm
O’Hagan, 2000 BCCA 79; British Columbia (Public Trustee) v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 6:48 pm by Steve Vladeck
Three weeks ago, CAAF granted review in United States v. [read post]
28 Aug 2016, 4:55 pm by Sabrina I. Pacifici
Second, the adoption of the misappropriation theory of insider trading in United States v. [read post]