Search for: "Polk v. Polk"
Results 41 - 60
of 613
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Dec 2022, 11:20 am
NOCO v. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
Posner, Cooley LLP, on Monday, December 19, 2022 Tags: board diversity, California, Crest v. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
Posner, Cooley LLP, on Monday, December 19, 2022 Tags: board diversity, California, Crest v. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 4:00 am
Most Viewed Posts of 2022 Here are the most viewed posts that were published in 2022: What American Hospital Association v. [read post]
16 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
Borak, Lee v. [read post]
16 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
Borak, Lee v. [read post]
13 Dec 2022, 8:17 am
In Dobbs v. [read post]
18 Nov 2022, 6:30 am
Lu, Sabastian V. [read post]
18 Nov 2022, 6:30 am
Lu, Sabastian V. [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 6:09 am
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2022, 3:50 am
,”‘Lockstep’ falls out of step with modern law firms,” FT.com, Dec 16, 2021 (discussing recent changes at Linklaters and Cravath); Debra Cassens Weiss, “BigLaw firm switches from strict lockstep compensation for partners to modified system,” ABA Journal, Sept 11, 2020 (discussing changes to lockstep model at Davis Polk). [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 9:05 pm
This Update focuses on the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division’s (“DOJ”) antitrust enforcement activity over the last year under this Executive Order’s direction.2 For further details on the Executive Order, please see Davis Polk’s prior Client Update regarding issuance of the Executive Order.3 FTC and DOJ have been conducting intensive merger and conduct investigations FTC Chair Lina Khan was… [read post]
14 Aug 2022, 9:01 pm
The 1946 Supreme Court decision in SEC v. [read post]
6 Jul 2022, 12:15 am
Polk & Co., Inc., 2022 WL 2255258. [read post]
26 Jun 2022, 12:28 am
The main residence of Veraton, circa 1907. [read post]
20 Jun 2022, 3:11 am
“An attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of a retainer” (Attallah v Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, 168 AD3d 1026, 1028 [2d Dept 2019]; see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435 [2007]). [read post]
17 Jun 2022, 3:44 am
” “It is well settled that “[a]n attorney may not be held liable for failing to act outside the scope of the retainer” (Genesis Merchant Partners, L.P. v Gilbride, Tusa, Last & Spellane, LLC, 157 AD3d 479,482 [1st Dept 2018], citingAmbase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardell, 8 NY3d 428 [2007]). [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 9:05 pm
[Editor’s Note: This post is based on a comment letter submitted to the U.S. [read post]
6 Jun 2022, 3:36 pm
From the decision Thursday by Judge Katherine Polk Failla (S.D.N.Y.) in Maron v. [read post]
25 May 2022, 9:44 am
Supreme Court cases: Lucia v. [read post]