Ex parte Young Supreme Court of the United States December 2, 3, 1907, Argued ; March 23, 1908 No. 10, Original Opinion  [*142]   [**446]  MR. JUSTICE PECKHAM, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court. We recognize and...

Dodocase VR, Inc. v. MerchSource, LLC United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit April 18, 2019, Decided 2018-1724 Opinion  [*932]  Prost , Chief Judge . MerchSource, LLC ("MerchSource") appeals the United States District Court for...

Bardy Diagnostics, Inc. v. Hill-Rom, Inc. Court of Chancery of Delaware June 4, 2021, Submitted; July 9, 2021, Decided C.A. No. 2021-0175-JRS Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION SLIGHTS, Vice Chancellor Hill-Rom, Inc. ("Hillrom") and its merger subsidiary...

Am. Needle, Inc. v. NFL Supreme Court of the United States January 13, 2010, Argued; May 24, 2010, Decided No. 08-661 Opinion  [*186]   [***955]   [**2206]  Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court. “Every contract, combination in the form of...

25 I. & N. Dec. 378; 2010 BIA LEXIS 35 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office For Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals November 17, 2010, Decided 3701 Opinion  [*378]  COLE, Board Member: In a decision dated August 19, 2009, an Immigration...

Fringe benefits and their tax treatment by prominent executives and others has been highlighted in the current news cycle. Many have pointed to the ambiguity of the term “fringe” and the complicated tax rules to defend their positions on everything...

With remote depositions having become the norm during the pandemic, some attorneys have assumed that Zoom depositions are admissible in court. Learn why they might be very wrong. READ NOW » Related Content Notice of Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition...

The Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act or Act) restructured the system for providing private health care benefits to coal industry retirees. The Act merged the 1950 and 1974 Benefit Plans -- which were created pursuant to collective...

The defendants, in close association, engaged in a fraudulent scheme to obtain money from a woman, whom one of the defendants married, and left after the purpose of the scheme was accomplished. While the marriage lasted, the husband obtained from the...

This is a case about collective intent — or lack thereof. Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") forbids a company or an individual from making a materially misleading statement to shareholders. But liability...