Search for: "Sellers v. Sellers"
Results 81 - 100
of 6,091
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jan 2024, 9:01 pm
Shareholders were represented by co-lead counsel firms Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll. 2.) [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 11:47 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 8:43 am
Kennedy v. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 1:40 am
The Sedlik v. [read post]
N.D. Cal. Judge Pushes Back on Copyright SAD Scheme Cases–Viral DRM v. YouTube Schedule A Defendants
21 Jan 2024, 8:13 am
–Emoji GmbH v. [read post]
21 Jan 2024, 6:56 am
So I would expect that Spotify will show up at the Copyright Royalty Board for Phonorecords V and insist on a safe harbor to enshrine stream discrimination into the Rube Goldberg streaming mechanical royalty rates. [read post]
20 Jan 2024, 1:46 pm
In Parque Towers Developers, LLC v. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 8:01 am
Clark v. [read post]
17 Jan 2024, 1:44 pm
In Zauderer v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 11:10 pm
It is worth looking again at the 2006 case of Barloworld Capital (Pty) Ltd t/a Barloworld Equipment Finance V Napier NO. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 1:19 pm
First, an activist short-seller’s work product is an unreliable source of new information about an issuer because the short-seller has an economic interest in driving down the stock price. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 12:47 pm
It doubles down on the “any market” issue—first, by marrying an express concern with labor-market effects with likely (or perhaps merely potential) impact on competition “in any line of commerce and in any section of the country,” (emphasis in original–that is, in the guidelines, not the Clayton Act) and, second, by stating that “a merger’s harm to competition among buyers is not saved by benefits to competition among sellers. [read post]
15 Jan 2024, 7:31 pm
As Zimmerman v. [read post]
11 Jan 2024, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. [read post]
10 Jan 2024, 9:25 am
See, e.g., Instructure, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 8:24 am
Snap, Lee v. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 10:00 pm
And because of the “as is” conditions of the sale, and given that no independent representations were made regarding the elevator’s condition, a contract breach claim could also not be maintained.228’s negligence and breach claims against the title company were also dismissed, as no “title defects” were asserted, and the company concededly notified the purchaser of the elevator violations.Given that the seller prevailed, and the parties’ agreement… [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 7:00 am
LLC (a seller of gas and water distribution products), and its cleaning-services company, IH Services, Inc., for $150,000.Apparently, IH Services had assigned three female janitors to Mueller’s Albertville, Alabama, manufacturing facility. [read post]
8 Jan 2024, 7:00 am
LLC (a seller of gas and water distribution products), and its cleaning-services company, IH Services, Inc., for $150,000.Apparently, IH Services had assigned three female janitors to Mueller’s Albertville, Alabama, manufacturing facility. [read post]
6 Jan 2024, 6:22 am
The Board found that there was no likelihood of confusion, and remitted the case to the Opposition Division.CopyrightNedim Malovic alerted readers to a recently-initiated case in Sweden that will apply the so-called 'best seller' provision from Article 20 DSM Directive. [read post]
