Search for: "Texaco, Inc. v. Short" Results 1 - 16 of 16
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Feb 2011, 4:00 am by Ted Folkman
Before turning to the new development, and for the purpose of putting things in the proper perspective, I would like to quote at some length from Texaco’s appellate brief in Aguinda v. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 7:57 am by Dennis Crouch
Texaco Inc., 60 F.3d 913, 930 (2d Cir. 1994). [2017-02-17_mpaa-ifta-sag-aftra_amicus-brief]. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 7:57 am by Dennis Crouch
Texaco Inc., 60 F.3d 913, 930 (2d Cir. 1994). [2017-02-17_mpaa-ifta-sag-aftra_amicus-brief]. [read post]
18 Apr 2020, 7:00 am by Sherin and Lodgen
The SJC cited a United States Supreme Court case involving a state statute extinguishing mineral rights when not exercised for 20 years, Texaco, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm by Mahmoud Khatib
Unfortunately, when negotiations between the parties break down, letters of intent are often at the center of litigation.[2] In perhaps the most famous example of litigation around the enforceability of a letter of intent, Pennzoil won a judgment against Texaco for $10.5 billion, and Texaco was forced to seek bankruptcy protection.[3] Despite the legal risks, companies continue to use letters of intent. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 8:47 am by Steven Boutwell
With the above context in mind, we now turn to McBride which, for a short time, brought punitive damages back to the high point of Merry Shipping. [read post]