On the back of Shell's recent review of its global legal panel, Simon Burnett of Balance Legal Capital examines the dangers of overemphasizing price - related factors in selecting panel firms and
discusses litigation finance as an alternative means of reducing external litigation spend.
Not exact matches
Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: our ability to achieve our financial, strategic and operational plans or initiatives; our ability to predict and manage medical costs and price effectively and develop and maintain good relationships with physicians, hospitals and other health care providers; the impact of modifications to our operations and processes; our ability to identify potential strategic acquisitions or transactions and realize the expected benefits of such transactions, including with respect to the Merger; the substantial level of government regulation over our business and the potential effects of new laws or regulations or changes in existing laws or regulations; the outcome of
litigation, regulatory audits, investigations, actions and / or guaranty fund assessments; uncertainties surrounding participation in government - sponsored programs such as Medicare; the effectiveness and security of our information technology and other business systems; unfavorable industry, economic or political conditions, including foreign currency movements; acts of war, terrorism, natural disasters or pandemics; our ability to obtain shareholder or regulatory approvals required for the Merger or the requirement to accept conditions that could reduce the anticipated benefits of the Merger as a condition to obtaining regulatory approvals; a longer time than anticipated to consummate the proposed Merger; problems regarding the successful integration of the businesses of Express Scripts and Cigna; unexpected costs regarding the proposed Merger; diversion of management's attention from ongoing business operations and opportunities during the pendency of the Merger; potential
litigation associated with the proposed Merger; the ability to retain key personnel; the availability of
financing, including relating to the proposed Merger; effects on the businesses as a result of uncertainty surrounding the proposed Merger; as well as more specific risks and uncertainties
discussed in our most recent report on Form 10 - K and subsequent reports on Forms 10 - Q and 8 - K available on the Investor Relations section of www.cigna.com as well as on Express Scripts» most recent report on Form 10 - K and subsequent reports on Forms 10 - Q and 8 - K available on the Investor Relations section of www.express-scripts.com.
Martha Derthick (University of Virginia), John Dinan (Wake Forest University), and Michael Heise (Cornell Law School)
discuss litigation over high - stakes testing and school
finance in the era of No Child Left Behind.
Such statements reflect the current views of Barnes & Noble with respect to future events, the outcome of which is subject to certain risks, including, among others, the general economic environment and consumer spending patterns, decreased consumer demand for Barnes & Noble's products, low growth or declining sales and net income due to various factors, including store closings, higher - than - anticipated or increasing costs, including with respect to store closings, relocation, occupancy (including in connection with lease renewals) and labor costs, the effects of competition, the risk of insufficient access to
financing to implement future business initiatives, risks associated with data privacy and information security, risks associated with Barnes & Noble's supply chain, including possible delays and disruptions and increases in shipping rates, various risks associated with the digital business, including the possible loss of customers, declines in digital content sales, risks and costs associated with ongoing efforts to rationalize the digital business and the digital business not being able to perform its obligations under the Samsung commercial agreement and the consequences thereof, the risk that financial and operational forecasts and projections are not achieved, the performance of Barnes & Noble's initiatives including but not limited to its new store concept and e-commerce initiatives, unanticipated adverse
litigation results or effects, potential infringement of Barnes & Noble's intellectual property by third parties or by Barnes & Noble of the intellectual property of third parties, and other factors, including those factors
discussed in detail in Item 1A, «Risk Factors,» in Barnes & Noble's Annual Report on Form 10 - K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2016, and in Barnes & Noble's other filings made hereafter from time to time with the SEC.
Most posts cover corporate
finance litigation; occasional posts
discuss the U.S. Supreme Court or note issues of interest to the individual investor.
Indeed there is a growing consensus that in the wake of the Jackson reforms, lawyers are now ethically obliged to
discuss financing options, including
litigation funding, with their clients at the start of a case.
News Werbner will
discuss Linde, et al. v. Arab Bank PLC in a presentation titled, «Fighting Terror -
Financing in the Courtroom,» during the State Bar of Texas
Litigation Update Institute's 34th annual course Jan. 11 — 12, 2018.
James Blick and Erika Levin
discuss contingency fee insurance in the New York Law Journal The U.S. and global
litigation finance markets... Continued
In a guest column for GC magazine, James Delaney, director at specialist
litigation finance and insurance broker The Judge,
discusses strategies for... Continued
In this post, I
discuss two of the major implications of the classification of a
litigation finance contract as a security.
As I
discussed in my first post, a
litigation finance contract may qualify as an «investment contract» subject to a federal securities regulation.
In this edition we
discuss trade mark infringement,
litigation privilege, warranty claims, fraud in invoice
financing, employee fraud and gagging clauses.
June 7, 2016 (Mimesis Law)-- Mark Cohen returns to
discuss Gawker's legal battle, Peter Thiel's involvement in the case and the questions about
litigation finance.