Search for: "In re STATE QUESTION NO. 236 v. WILLIAMSON"
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
Some have argued that, because the Nation’s approach to climate change is politically contested,[1] and since these matters affect major policy questions over which Congress has not granted the SEC new, explicit powers, the Commission lacks authority to require disclosure in this area.[2] For the reasons given below, the Commission should disregard these claims, focusing instead on the challenging policy choices that any finalization of the proposal would require. [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm
See Hay v. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm
Co. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2015, 11:46 am
Purdue Pharma Co., 236 F. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 3:40 pm
” Wang, 236 F.R.D. at 491. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 5:00 am
It's not a state law claim - the Supreme Court has never applied a "fraud on the market" presumption to state law even in securities cases.The presumption arose because the Supreme Court bought a questionable proposition – that securities markets are “efficient” and "developed. [read post]