Search for: "State v. Price"
Results 341 - 360
of 12,986
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Nov 2014, 9:30 am
In State v. [read post]
29 Aug 2022, 11:01 am
United States, No. 21-1702; and M6-VETS, LLC v. [read post]
14 May 2010, 4:30 am
Forest Group, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 1:36 pm
Recall that Connecticut v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 8:25 am
States have at times tried to restrict such labeling, but BellSouth Tellecommunications, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2019, 6:04 am
State v. [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 12:17 pm
State v. [read post]
7 Sep 2018, 10:44 am
Although Silver’s complaint included publicly available information, his personal knowledge of non-public information about defendant PharMerica’s pricing was critical to his allegations of fraudulent conduct. [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 10:08 pm
First State Bank Cent. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 11:28 am
Relying on Summers v. [read post]
26 Jun 2020, 2:53 am
On the ball as always, Joost told me that the appeal in Neurim Pharmaceuticals v. [read post]
5 Nov 2010, 1:11 pm
However, Lumbermans has stated that part of the deficiency in the price reports is a lack of sufficient information. [read post]
11 Dec 2011, 12:04 pm
It is a classic states v. federal argument that won't go away any time soon. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 5:54 am
Monroe County Employees' Retirement System v. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 11:25 pm
Many states maintain their per se prohibitions in their own antitrust statutes against vertical price-fixing. [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 9:54 am
As this blog has discussed previously, the law surrounding resale price maintenance has been unclear ever since the Supreme Court's decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 9:00 am
Legal Writing Pro Ross Guberman offers an analysis of Wal-Mart’s brief in the recent United States Supreme Court case Wal-Mart v. [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 1:33 am
” Similarly, in Germany in Nokia v Daimler, the Mannheim court stated that the “royalty provided in [Daimler’s] counter-offer is not reasonable, as the reference value used in the top-down approach in the form of the average purchase price of [TCUs] is unsuitable. [read post]
14 Jan 2014, 8:25 am
Hood v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
Finally, that loss was the result of an unfair business practice: Pharmacies paid more than they otherwise would have because of a price-fixing conspiracy in violation of state law. [read post]
