0 results for 'Bressler Amery Ross'
Employee 'Free Choice' Act: The Ultimate Union Bailout
Get ready for passage of a law that will simultaneously deprive employees of the right to decide whether to join a union free of union coercion or intimidation and employers of the right to campaign against a union.Aly v. E.S. Sutton Realty et al, etc.,
Here, where a Pennsylvania insurance company authorized to offer commercial general-liability insurance policies in New Jersey was placed into rehabilitation by a Pennsylvania court, which also ordered a stay of all proceedings in Pennsylvania "or elsewhere" against the company and against all its insureds for 90 days, which stay was extended numerous times, principles of comity dictate that New Jersey trial courts honor the initial stay for rehabilitation and that they continue to honor the extensions iThe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Cybergenics Corporation v. Chinery, etc., et al,
Bankruptcy courts may authorize creditors' committees to sue derivatively to avoid fraudulent transfers for the benefit of the estate; Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Union Planters Bank, a Chapter 7 case that interpreted the text of 11 U.S.C. � 506(c) to foreclose anyone other than a trustee from seeking to recover administrative costs on its own behalf, does not operate to prevent the Bankruptcy Court from authorizing such suits; the judgment of the District Court is reversed.ARCNET Architects, Inc. v. New Jersey Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association
Pursuant to the 2004 amendment to the Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association Act that clarified the definition of "covered claims," attorneys' fees and other claim expenses incurred prior to the date of an insurance company's insolvency are not, and never have been, covered claims; thus, the attorneys' fees and other related claim expenses here, incurred before the amendment's effective date, are not payable by PLIGA.In re Mercedes-Benz Antitrust Litigation
Where defendants moved for summary judgment and plaintiffs moved to strike affidavits filed in support of the motion because of defendants' failure to disclose affiants' identities (an officer for the corporation and an expert), or that they had knowledge of issues in support of the motion, defendants were required to disclose the identify of the officer but not the expert, and such failure was not harmless or justified; although the affidavit is not excluded, plaintiffs are given opportunity to depose him.Trending Stories
Unlocking the Power of Early Case Assessment Workflows
Brought to you by Integreon
Download Now
Good Legal Technology is Good Business: A Case for Bringing Employment Issues In-House
Brought to you by LexisNexis®
Download Now
Insights and Strategies for Effective Succession Planning in AM Law 100 Firms
Brought to you by Gallagher
Download Now
State AI Legislation Is on the Move in 2024
Brought to you by LexisNexis®
Download Now