Search for: "United States v. General Petroleum Corporation"
Results 161 - 180
of 251
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2012, 12:05 pm
Kennedy said: “Suppose an American corporation commits human trafficking with U.S. citizens in the United States. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 10:30 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum, which, as posted, "presents the question of whether corporations can be sued for torts 'committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States'" pursuant to the Alien Tort Statute. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 6:35 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum, in which the issue is whether corporations can be sued for serious human rights abuses under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), 28 USC 1350. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 3:10 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum and Mohamad v. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 8:10 pm
Royal Dutch Petroleum Tuesday, to determine whether corporations can be sued for serious human rights abuses under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), 28 USC 1350. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 6:12 pm
In the Washington Post, former Bush Administration State Department Legal Advisor John Bellinger, argues that ATS lawsuits are being used to harass corporations into settlements, to interfere with other nation’s domestic affairs, and to embroil the United States in disputes with important foreign allies like the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Germany. [read post]
27 Feb 2012, 6:47 am
University of Texas at Austin and the arguments in United States v. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 3:51 pm
The case is Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum (2d Cir. 2010), in which Nigerian plaintiffs seek to hold Royal Dutch/Shell liable for violating the Alien Tort Statute (“ATS”), 28 U.S.C. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 11:42 pm
United Kingdom, ECHR-Reports 2001-XI, p. 101, Kalegoropoulou v. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 7:42 am
Currently, the disposal of wastewater generated by shale gas production activities is regulated by the states. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 8:46 am
As Myriam Gilles and Gary Friedman explain in a forthcoming article in the Universityof Chicago Law Review, for example, state attorneys general may provide the only antidote to the loss of the small claim class action after AT&T v. [read post]
16 Jan 2012, 10:02 am
CORIOLAN, Appellant, v. [read post]
7 Jan 2012, 7:48 am
This has significant effects upon the United States. . . . [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 6:53 am
Yup, the United States Supreme Court decided two cases on our top ten list on the same day. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 4:07 am
He has resolved disputes and crafted deals for more than two decades as a business and commercial litigator, general counsel, and president of a technology corporation. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 2:15 pm
As previously reported here, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in the case of Kiobel v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 4:00 am
’[3] On the question of domestic law the Court finds that ‘the law of the United States has been uniform since its founding that corporations can be held liable for the torts committed by their agents. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 3:00 am
The article dissects the legal reasoning of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum[1] and argues that the majority simply got it wrong principally by conflating ‘the jurisdictional and cause of action aspects of an ATS suit’. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 2:00 am
The views expressed in these posts are those of the authors, and not of the Attorney-General's department or the Australian Government] The decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Kiobel v Royal Dutch Petroleum is remarkable for a number a reasons. [read post]
6 Nov 2011, 5:00 pm
The first was Freeman v. [read post]
