Search for: "State v. Price" Results 281 - 300 of 12,897
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Dec 2022, 4:23 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
” In Rafe, the Court found that “since no price is stated at which the plaintiff must sell” to defendant “and which the latter is required to pay to the plaintiff for the plaintiff’s stock,” the contract “may be construed as rendering the sale of the plaintiff’s stock impossible to anyone except to the individual defendant at whatever price he wishes to pay. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 6:55 am by Eric Goldman
by Kieran McCarthy [Eric’s note: this is the second of a two-part series on the denouement of the hiQ v. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 6:00 am by Guest Blogger
  This process of judicial nullification culminated in Plessy v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:55 am by Lawrence Solum
Consider the prison-industrial complex, where states force inmates to pay monopoly prices while suppressing competition for commissary items, phone services, medicine, and more. [read post]
6 Dec 2022, 3:45 am by Kyle Hulehan
The tax gain for North Carolina is likely less than the tax loss for New York, while the lower effective (tax-reduced) price reduces costs for New York smokers. [read post]
5 Dec 2022, 4:23 am by Peter Mahler
The Care One Case The above facts are drawn from a not-for-publication opinion handed down last month by a three-judge panel of the New Jersey Appellate Division — that state’s intermediate appellate court — in a case captioned Care One, LLC, et al. v Adina Straus and Jeffrey Rubin. [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 12:03 pm by Unknown
On June 21, 2022, the plaintiff’s attorney sent the SEC a letter requesting records pertaining to communications the Commission had with representatives for exchanges, market makers, retail broker-dealers, industry organizations and/or similar entities about retail stock order handling and execution, price improvement, order-by-order competition and routing to auctions. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 1:58 pm by Kevin LaCroix
However, the class action complaint alleges the purported $120 per share consideration fell well below the market price of the VMware stock that the Class V stock was intended to track. [read post]