Search for: "Pappas v. Pappas" Results 41 - 60 of 168
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2018, 3:46 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
That is just one lesson from a recent decision by Manhattan Commercial Division Justice Saliann Scarpulla in Pappas v 38-40 LLC, 2018 NY Slip Op 30329(U) [Sup Ct NY County Feb. 22, 2018]). [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 11:21 am by Steven Cohen
George Pappas and the defendant challenged this testimony. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 3:24 am by Peter Mahler
Ironically, Carter did not cite the one case I know about in which a court suggested in dicta that Section 1104-a (d) is inapplicable in the absence of a Section 1118 buy-out — the 2010 decision in Pappas v Fotinos which I wrote about here. [read post]
22 Mar 2017, 6:45 am by Walter Olson
On Monday the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of Murr v. [read post]
18 Mar 2017, 8:20 am by Ilya Somin
The Cato Institute has posted a video of a panel they hosted on Murr v. [read post]
9 Aug 2016, 10:44 am by Chris Castle
  If you have been following the machinations by the Obama Justice Department [sic] over amending the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees,  you may have found yourself wondering who was responsible for rejecting the good faith efforts of the songwriting community in favor of a cynical back room deal with multinational tech companies and broadcasters. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 5:01 pm by Law Lady
RICHARD STONE, M.D., et al., Appellees. 3rd District.Wrongful death -- Product liability -- TobaccoDIANA PAPPAS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of MINA PAPPAS, Deceased, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. [read post]
6 Apr 2015, 3:37 am by Peter Mahler
The court’s decision in PF2 Securities Evaluations, Inc. v Fillebeen, 2015 NY Slip Op 30436(U) [Sup Ct NY County Mar. 26, 2015], invoked in tandem the majority shareholders’ fiduciary duty and the minority shareholder’s rights to be “free of oppressive conduct” and “in the event of a consensual buy-out . . . to receive a fair market value for his stock after fair and complete disclosure and valuation. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 3:29 am by Peter Mahler
It’s a type of deal protection, for example, that would have avoided the seller’s remorse suffered by the unsuccessful plaintiffs in the well-known New York case, Pappas v Tzolis, who sold their majority stake for $1.5 million to the minority owner who, within months, sold the company’s sole asset to a third party for $17.5 million. [read post]