We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-6 of 6

What matters: A review of 2011 and 2012

  • Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 1 2013

As you know, the last two years have seen a somewhat improved, but by no means robust, business climate. At the same time, structural shifts in the

Preview 2013 (UK law)

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • -
  • January 15 2013

2013 will herald some significant changes to the UK legal arena, notably in the corporate area in relation to executive remuneration and narrative

General counsel update: 31 May 2012

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • Argentina, China, European Union, Hong Kong, Singapore, Spain, United Kingdom
  • -
  • May 31 2012

This is the twenty-ninth in our series of General Counsel Updates which aim to summarise major developments in key areas

Suit challenging leed certification dismissed

  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 12 2011

A U.S. District Court judge dismissed a lawsuit alleging that the U.S. Green Building Council violated the false advertising provision of the Lanham Act because the plaintiffs a building professional, an architect, and an engineer were not competitors and lacked standing to bring the suit without a demonstration of a damaged commercial interest

Southern District of New York hears oral argument on motion to dismiss in Gifford et al. v. USGBC

  • Arent Fox LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 29 2011

This past Tuesday, July 26, U.S. District Court Judge Leonard Sand heard oral argument on USGBC’s motion to dismiss Henry Gifford’s amended complaint in Gifford et al. v. USGBC, still pending in the Southern District of New York

Richmond casino case: how early is too early for CEQA?

  • Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 15 2010

In Parchester Village Neighborhood Council v. City of Richmond, the California Court of Appeal recently held that the City of Richmond’s decision to enter into a Municipal Services Agreement (MSA) with a Native American tribe did not constitute a “project” requiring California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, even though the agreement effectively committed the City to a particular course of action