Search for: "Stock v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 5,908
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Feb 2016, 7:33 am
Dudenhoeffer, which set forth the standards for stating a claim for breach of the duty of prudence against fiduciaries who manage employee stock ownership plans. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 5:00 am
The issue of director independence came up in SEC v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 12:47 pm
My analysis of the November argument in Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. [read post]
16 Jul 2022, 8:25 am
” Perkins v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 6:52 pm
United States v. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 11:35 am
Tifford, PA v. [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 7:51 am
Willacy v. [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 9:01 pm
Instead, Judge Kavanaugh read the Supreme Court’s Heller decision and its 2010 decision in McDonald v. [read post]
22 May 2012, 12:40 pm
Fifteen state attorneys general have signed this letter to US AG Eric Holder, asking him to appeal the atrocious decision of the US District Court in DC in Beaty v. [read post]
7 Jun 2017, 3:38 pm
United States, No. 16‐3300 (7th Cir. 2017)). [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 7:11 am
United States ,” which will lead you to all the posts. [read post]
16 Feb 2012, 5:47 pm
" U.S. v. [read post]
30 May 2008, 2:04 pm
Ponsoldt, 4 a claim that stock options have been wrongly issued to management states a claim for waste and is solely derivative in nature. [read post]
4 Dec 2021, 3:14 pm
See United States v. [read post]
3 May 2013, 10:34 am
Issuing shares of stock for mergers and acquisitions, however, triggers the need to either register the new shares with the SEC (and possibly state securities regulators) or to find an exemption from the requirements found under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 4:04 pm
The court cites to US v. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 8:58 am
In Conopco, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2021, 2:56 pm
Stock image. [read post]
18 Feb 2010, 7:09 am
In Nestlé Purina Petcare Co. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2022, 4:23 am
” Affirming this holding, the Court of Appeals ruled, “We agree that article 9 of the corporation’s by-laws is void as an absolute restraint on the power of alienation violative of the public policy in this State” (Quinn v Stuart Lakes Club, Inc., 57 NY2d 1003 [1982]). [read post]
