Search for: "Thomas v. Rosen" Results 81 - 100 of 163
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jun 2017, 6:25 am
McIntosh, Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz, on Tuesday, May 30, 2017 Tags: Board communication, Boards of Directors, Compliance & ethics, Cybersecurity, Disclosure, Risk committee, Risk disclosure, Risk management, Risk oversight, SEC, Securities regulation Dancing with Activists Posted by Lucian A. [read post]
24 Feb 2017, 5:06 am by Scott Bomboy
In an original jurisdiction lawsuit, Nebraska and Oklahoma v. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 2:30 am by NCC Staff
President Thomas Jefferson and Marbury v. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 1:30 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
It will look back to several important recent Supreme Court decisions, in particular Whole Woman’s Health v. [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 6:08 am
Arlen and Marcel Kahan, NYU School of Law, on Wednesday, September 14, 2016 Tags: Accountability, Agency costs, Corporate crime, Corporate liability, Deferred prosecution agreements, DOJ, Liability standards, Management, Misconduct, Non-prosecution agreement, Securities enforcement, Settlements The Law and Brexit V Posted by Thomas J. [read post]
19 Aug 2016, 6:16 am
Karpoff, University of Washington, on Monday, August 15, 2016 Tags: Acquisitions, Agency costs, Antitakeover, Boards of Directors, Entrenchment, Firm valuation, Hostile takeover,Management, Mergers & acquisitions, Poison pills, Shareholder value, Takeover defenses, Takeovers The Law and Brexit III Posted by Thomas J. [read post]
5 Aug 2016, 6:27 am
Loseman, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, on Saturday, July 30, 2016 Tags: Class actions, Delaware cases, Delaware law, Disclosure, Fraud-on-the-Market, Halliburton, Merger litigation,Omnicare v. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 5:47 pm by Law Lady
TOMMY CONSTANTINE RACING, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, and TOMMY CONSTANTINE, a/k/a THOMAS CONSTANTINE, individually, Appellees. 4th District. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 4:00 am by Administrator
” Philip Rosen believes that this practice reflects a prosecutorial bias on the part of the Department of Justice, resulting in a “deference to judicial determinations of guilt and an insufficiently rigorous questioning of the foundations of criminal convictions. [read post]