Search for: "Sox v. United States" Results 1 - 20 of 112
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2013, 11:19 am by laborprof lpb
This past Friday, the United State Supreme Court granted cert. in the case of Lawson v. [read post]
7 Jan 2012, 7:48 am by Richard Renner
This has significant effects upon the United States. . . . [read post]
18 Jan 2011, 11:58 am by Richard Renner
United States Dep’t of Labor, 134 F.3d 1292, 1295 (6th Cir. 1998). [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 8:01 am by Morse, Barnes-Brown Pendleton
By: Joseph Marrow On March 4, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in a much anticipated whistleblower retaliation case. [read post]
15 Nov 2012, 11:38 am by Cynthia L. Hackerott
In a case arising out of a securities scandal involving publicly traded medical device company Arthrocare, the SEC could, acting under Section 304 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX), seek statutory reimbursement —on behalf of Arthrocare—of cash bonuses, incentives, and equity-based compensation earned by Arthrocare’s CEO and CFO, a federal district court in Texas has ruled (SEC v Baker, WDTex, November 13, 2012). [read post]
28 May 2011, 9:21 am by Amy Burns
(In the Court’s opinion, for example, Justice Breyer notes that one can go to Fenway Park with the intent of seeing the Red Sox, even if they are not playing that day and there is thus very little chance of actually seeing them play.) [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 5:36 am by Joy Waltemath
Therefore, the Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment in his employer’s favor (Wiest v. [read post]
15 May 2007, 12:09 pm
Thus, the premium associated with trading in the United States was roughly constant, while the premium associated with being subject to U.S. regulation declined. [read post]