Search for: "Precisely Holdings LLC"
Results 41 - 60
of 959
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 May 2014, 12:32 pm
Circuit decision, AF Holdings, LLC v. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 3:19 am
Mercer’s 0% DLOM, if not with his precise reasons, stating as follows: [Man Choi Chiu] is not entitled to a lack of marketability discount. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 5:49 pm
AMN Services, LLC, holding that: Employers cannot utilize the rounding of time punches in the meal period context, even if the rounding policy is neutral and even if over time it results in the employees being paid for more time worked; and Records showing noncompliant meal periods raise a presumption of meal period violations that employers must rebut by: (1) establishing that employees were compensated for noncompliant meal periods; or (2) establishing that compliant meal periods… [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 12:01 pm
The court observed that no Delaware case appears to have dealt with the precise issue presented here: Namely, what is the impact of a tortious interferer acting in bad faith as a fiduciary to a debtor in service of a creditor counterparty in which the fiduciary holds an interest? [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 6:41 am
Naughty Monkey LLC v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:52 pm
"Judge Callahan holds, however, that there's precisely such “clearly irreconcilable” intervening authority: Sorrell v. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 6:54 am
Playtex Products, LLC, 2011 WL 2174383 (C.D. [read post]
29 Oct 2011, 7:53 pm
Wren Holdings, LLC, C.A. [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 2:48 am
February 19, 2019), the Court granted in part and denied in part the identical motions of defendants AGCO Corporation and Precision Planting LLC to dismiss Plaintiff Deere & Company’s claims for enhanced damages based on willful infringement for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). [read post]
26 Apr 2016, 9:06 am
Although these clauses are common, their precise meaning and effect can still raise novel legal issues. [read post]
26 Apr 2016, 9:06 am
Although these clauses are common, their precise meaning and effect can still raise novel legal issues. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 6:10 am
The post New Jersey Supreme Court Holds “Illusory Discounts” Do Not Support a Claim of Ascertainable Loss Under the Consumer Fraud Act appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 6:10 am
The post New Jersey Supreme Court Holds “Illusory Discounts” Do Not Support a Claim of Ascertainable Loss Under the Consumer Fraud Act appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
25 Apr 2024, 6:10 am
The post New Jersey Supreme Court Holds “Illusory Discounts” Do Not Support a Claim of Ascertainable Loss Under the Consumer Fraud Act appeared first on Gibbons Law Alert. [read post]
19 May 2020, 5:00 pm
The First Department analogized the case to its holding in Richbell Info. [read post]
27 Jan 2010, 10:38 am
., LLC, 2010 WL 184312 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 12:04 pm
Latisys Holdings, LLC, C.A. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 9:05 am
Plaintiff-appellant Ochre, LLC (“Ochre”) submits that the law has not, and should not, evolve to that point. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 9:19 am
Holdings, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Nov 2014, 5:14 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. [read post]
