Search for: "Price v. Hogan"
Results 1 - 20
of 67
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Oct 2014, 7:38 pm
Watson, Hogan Lovell [read post]
14 Jun 2010, 12:30 am
[Her Majesty the Queen v. [read post]
30 Nov 2022, 2:13 pm
Allegheny County Employees’ Retirement System v. [read post]
15 May 2017, 6:56 am
Nevertheless, the FTC attached the Hogan and Landes reports as exhibits to its arguments about why Prof. [read post]
25 May 2010, 10:15 am
This would be similar to LaRussa v. [read post]
6 Jul 2011, 9:56 am
FTC v. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 6:46 am
District Court for the District of Oregon granted class certification in Whaley et al. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 5:16 am
Hogan J. [read post]
24 Sep 2019, 11:31 am
Blog post: 1-800 Contacts Charges Higher Prices Than Its Online Competitors, But They Are OK With That–FTC v. 1-800 Contacts * Complaint Counsel’s Corrected Pre-Trial Brief and Exhibits. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 4:00 am
Hogan Lovells Issues Legal Analysis of the EU-U.S. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 10:31 am
Then again, from 1-800 Contacts’ perspective, $15M is a small price to pay for the ability to charge supra-competitive prices to consumers for 15+ years. [read post]
31 Aug 2016, 7:00 am
Among other problems were dealing with US v UK spelling differences. [read post]
2 Jun 2017, 6:30 am
Neal Katyal of Hogan Lovells, the former Solicitor General and premier appellate litigator. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 7:24 am
In Paroline v. [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 10:20 am
Rival online sellers generally offer lower prices than 1-800 Contacts, and much of the advertising for those retailers emphasizes those lower prices. [read post]
10 Apr 2016, 4:00 am
Computer and Internet Weekly Updates for 2016-04-02 https://t.co/mhslDiKMI4 -> Google-funded study concludes: Make DMCA even more Google-friendly https://t.co/dLxs6S3vrx -> Hogan Lovells Issues Legal Analysis of the EU-U.S. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 4:37 pm
For example, in Hanahoe v Hussey [1998] 3 IR 69, [1997] IEHC 173 (14 November 1997) and Gray v Minister for Justice [2007] 2 IR 654, [2007] IEHC 52 (17 January 2007) (extensively discussed here, here, and here), the plaintiffs recovered damages in respect of leaks by Gardaí of their private information. [read post]
7 Dec 2008, 5:00 am
Pacific Bell v. linkLine Communications (07-512), on whether the Section 2 of the Sherman Act recognizes a “price squeeze” claim against a company with no anitrust duty to deal with retail competitors. [read post]
23 Dec 2020, 5:31 am
With the AmeriKat in virtual hearing prep, Josh Strickland (Hogan Lovells) was on hand to summarize the evening's proceedings for our furry friends in the UK and beyond. [read post]
