Search for: "People v. Sellers (1988)" Results 41 - 57 of 57
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
” In 1933, the year the Securities Act was enacted, Roosevelt said, “It changes the ancient doctrine of caveat emptor to ‘let the seller beware,’ and puts the burden on the seller rather than on the buyer. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 2:50 pm by Howard Knopf
Anyway, it’s probably a non-starter of a suggestion, since there are very few if any people in Canada who are sufficiently expert lawyers or economists to fulfill this role and who would not already have too much baggage to carry and still be perceived as credible to all concerned.So, I expect that my fear – shared by others – that this gratuitous statutory  references to the “public interest” and a “competitive market” will become an excuse… [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 2:47 pm by Beck, et al.
PepsiCo, Inc., 836 F.2d 173, 182 (3d Cir. 1988) (“plaintiff must plead the essential facts” because “litigation today is too expensive a process to waste time on fanciful claims”); Heart Disease Research Foundation v. [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 4:00 am by Ken Chasse
What all apps do not in themselves provide, is the solicitor-client relationship with its many benefits, which benefits cannot be provided by the buyer-seller relationship of transactions involving apps when used without lawyers. [read post]
3 Feb 2020, 2:13 pm by Kevin Kaufman
Part of having transparency in the tax code is having the people’s representatives decide if there will be a tax increase. [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 4:00 am by Ken Chasse
But people wish they could afford the protections of a lawyer’s solicitor-client relationship instead of having to depend upon merely LegalZoom’s buyer-seller relationship. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 2:18 pm by Kevin LaCroix
”[v] This means compliance must be shown not only for plaintiff Jones but also for every offer and every sale in the “offering. [read post]
4 Nov 2013, 9:46 am by Jane Chong
Over the last month, on our New Republic: Security States newsfeed, we rolled out a series designed to explain why fairly allocating the costs of software deficiencies between software makers and users is so critical to addressing the growing problem of vulnerability-ridden code—and how such a regime will require questioning some of our deep-seated beliefs about the very nature of software security. [read post]