Search for: "State v. Knight" Results 21 - 40 of 1,225
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jan 2024, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
From the Complaint filed Thursday in Avodah Farms v. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 1:19 pm by Kevin LaCroix
When these “dark knights of Wall Street,” as a recent Law360 Expert Analysis article called them, succeed in driving down a stock price, aggressive securities plaintiff attorneys heed the bat signal and litigate against the affected issuer when they may not have done so otherwise.[1] After all, the defendant company may not have publicly disclosed anything at the time when the activist short-seller decided to launch a faux-fraud campaign to profit from their short position. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 10:10 am by Sherica Celine
Recent Supreme Court Rulings Impacting Labor & Employment Podcast Listen to attorney Tim Taylor of Holland & Knight discuss the implications of Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2023, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
 The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed an amicus curiae brief with the US Supreme Court in Moody v. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 9:05 pm by renholding
To test this, we classify U.S. states based on the percentage of voters who voted for the Republican or Democrat candidate in the 2016 presidential election. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 4:53 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Holland & Knight LLC v Walsam 316, LLC 2023 NY Slip Op 33748(U) October 17, 2023Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 654470/2022Judge: Dakota D. [read post]
23 Nov 2023, 7:04 am by Russell Knight
Therefore, the original complaint failed to state a cause of action for fraud” Ault v. [read post]
17 Nov 2023, 11:41 am by Kevin LaCroix
Insurers would be required to pay Appian $500 million if the state supreme court rules that Pegasystems should have won. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 4:00 am by Ian Mackenzie
In Baker, the court did use the judicial process as a guidepost for assessing procedural fairness when it repeated its conclusion in Knight v. [read post]