Search for: "Meyer v. Davis" Results 21 - 40 of 64
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Dec 2011, 3:40 pm by Rick Hasen
   Perhaps most relevant is this in-chambers opinion of Chief Justice Roberts in Lux v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 6:00 am by Kara OBrien
January 10th: SEC’s New Whistleblower Bounty Program - Richard Owens of Latham & Watkins and Linda Chatman Thomsen of Davis Polk & Wardwell will discuss the new regulation and how it may likely affect capital market participants, including the likely final provisions of the regulation, who will and who will not qualify for “whistleblower” status, what constitutes “original information,” the size of the “bounties” and much more. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 1:22 pm
Menetrez fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge John V. [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 5:29 am by Chris Seaton
No less an authority than the United States Supreme Court declared this a non-issue this year when they denied certiorari in Davis v. [read post]
8 Jun 2018, 4:18 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
[FN2] Given the [*3]absence of detailed facts, the legal malpractice cause of action should have been dismissed (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d 908, 910 [2016]; Rodriguez v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP, 126 AD3d at 1185-1186; Kreamer v Town of Oxford, 96 AD3d 1128, 1128 [2012]; compare Soule v Lozada, 232 AD2d 825, 825 [1996]). [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
Parke Davis & Co., 402 N.E.2d 194, 198-99 (Ill. 1980); Needham v. [read post]
15 Oct 2008, 11:32 am
Judge Price filed a dissenting opinion joined by Judges Meyers, Johnson, and Holcomb. [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 4:25 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Given the [*2]absence of detailed facts, the legal malpractice cause of action should have been dismissed (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d 908, 910 [2016]; Rodriguez v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP, 126 AD3d at 1185-1186; Kreamer v Town of Oxford, 96 AD3d 1128, 1128 [2012]; compare Soule v Lozada, 232 AD2d 825, 825 [1996]). [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 11:56 am
A Jan. 24 request for the fees names both the state and the wholesalers, although Meyer said his group has no plans to cover any of the costs. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
Parke, Davis & Co., 256 F.3d 1013, 1021 (10th Cir. 2001) (wrong to “construe [a treater’s] ‘heeding’ an adequate warning to mean [s/he] would have given the warning”) (applying Oklahoma law); In re Diet Drug Litigation, 895 A.2d 480, 490-91 (N.J. [read post]
8 May 2008, 12:22 pm
Parke, Davis & Co., 657 F.2d 642 (4th Cir. 1981). [read post]