Search for: "National Loan Investors v. Givens et al."
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Sep 2023, 9:01 pm
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. et al. affirmed dismissal of state-law securities claims because the syndicated term loan in question was not a “security” and therefore not subject to state and federal securities laws and regulations.[1] Background As explained in a prior client alert, Kirschner arose out of a $1.775 billion syndicated loan transaction in which several banks served as lenders to Millennium Laboratories LLC (“Millennium”), a… [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
GraceTERRY MABRY et al. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 4:03 pm
As a result, the Savoys received the same judicial treatment as Foster and Mock, who may have been victims of predatory lending (given the high interest rates and origination fees on their loans), but had never paid anything. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 11:33 am
In another, Logan Alters, et al. v. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 3:08 pm
Title: Placer Dome, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 5:23 pm
” See: Gomes v. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 12:57 am
In an unreported August 1, 2011 ruling in National Credit Union Administration v. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 2:23 pm
In Salzberg v. [read post]
20 Sep 2014, 1:06 pm
(Pix (c) Larry Catá Backer 2014) Since 2010, I have been posting on the development of a new course I have been developing for our first year law school students, "Elements of Law. [read post]
25 May 2022, 9:01 pm
The SEC then advised companies to carefully review their sanctions compliance function, given the extensive sanctions imposed on Russian entities and individuals. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 12:57 am
In an unreported August 1, 2011 ruling in National Credit Union Administration v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 2:15 pm
Okay, so here’s the next installment of Mandelman’s Monthly Museletter, which I’ve decided I post whenever there are a bunch of things going on that need to be put into proper perspective, but there’s just no way I can write individual articles on each because to do so presents a serious health risk. [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 9:05 pm
Given the cost of preparing the required reports, it is possible that some firms – especially those that are not worried about the adverse publicity or consumer or investor backlash – will opt to pay the penalty instead, though doing so may open them to reputation damage from nonprofit environmental groups, consumers, and pro-climate companies. [read post]
