Search for: "Sorrels v. Sorrels" Results 81 - 100 of 408
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 Dec 2023, 6:30 am
Larcker and Brian Tayan (Stanford University), on Friday, December 22, 2023 Tags: Board of Directors, CEO compensation, CEO succession, CEO turnover, Chapek, Disney, Iger, Staggs, succession planning, talent development Delaware Chancery Court Addresses Benefit-of-the-Bargain Damages in Busted Deals Posted by Amy Simmerman, Brad Sorrels, and Ryan Greecher, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, on Saturday, December 23, 2023 Tags: Acquisitions, benefit-of-the-bargain damages, Crispo… [read post]
29 Dec 2023, 6:30 am
Larcker and Brian Tayan (Stanford University), on Friday, December 22, 2023 Tags: Board of Directors, CEO compensation, CEO succession, CEO turnover, Chapek, Disney, Iger, Staggs, succession planning, talent development Delaware Chancery Court Addresses Benefit-of-the-Bargain Damages in Busted Deals Posted by Amy Simmerman, Brad Sorrels, and Ryan Greecher, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, on Saturday, December 23, 2023 Tags: Acquisitions, benefit-of-the-bargain damages, Crispo… [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 6:41 pm by Hunton & Williams LLP
On June 23, 2011, in a 6-3 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled in IMS Health Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 11:04 am by Bexis
With the ink barely dry on the Supreme Court’s recent decision that pharmaceutical detailing is First Amendment protected commercial speech, see Sorrell v. [read post]
18 Jan 2008, 12:32 pm
My colleague Capt Tiaundra Sorrell is the appellate defense counsel in United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 12:00 pm by Eugene Volokh
(Eugene Volokh) This important commercial speech and business law case was just argued this Tuesday, and my Mayer Brown LLP colleague Andrew Tauber has a very helpful and substantive summary of the oral argument; I highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in the subject. [read post]
16 Feb 2017, 1:48 pm by David Markus
Bd., 557 F.3d 1177, 1206 (11th Cir. 2009), and applying heightened scrutiny as articulated in Sorrell v. [read post]