注册并分享邀请链接,可获得视频播放与邀请奖励。

与「Litigation」相关的搜索结果

Litigation 贴吧
一个关键词就是一个贴吧,路径全站唯一。
创建贴吧
用户
未找到
包含 Litigation 的内容
Time to go on offense with a blizzard of litigation. School districts can no longer justify their trans sports/restroom/locker policies as being required by Title IX (or equal protection).
0
2
73
15
转发到社区
A memo was sent today to all NFL teams saying that the NFLPA and Brendan Sorsby will not be pursuing any further litigation regarding his entry into the NFL—and that instead, Sorsby will focus on his preparation for entry into the 2027 NFL Draft. Sorsby will be considered a “Draft-Eligible” player for the 2027 NFL Draft and will not be eligible to sign an NFL Player Contract until the completion of the 2027 NFL Draft.
显示更多
0
95
1.6K
191
转发到社区
New auditor ethics rule will reshape malpractice litigation
In Meta’s social media litigation, who pays the lawyers?
倪大说的对,欺诈是极难成立的。 但我们的主角MSTR 在 2000 年已经吃过一轮集体诉讼,被迫和解支付了超六亿美元的和解金。 信心是金融市场的血液,集体诉讼就是放血的刀子。 不需要割到动脉,一个伤口,一次证据开示,32 个币,就够了。 所以不需要等到判决,只需要等到不确定性(达成和解)。 确实在美国,欺诈很难成立。 《私人证券诉讼改革法案》(PSLRA,Private Securities Litigation Reform Act)门槛高,Tellabs 案(Tellabs v. Makor Issues, 551 U.S. 308)标准严,主观故意(Scienter)要"强烈推断",每一项都是墙。 但事实上,美国集体诉讼从来不是打到判决的游戏。 是打到证据开示(Discovery)的游戏。 原告只需要熬过驳回动议(Motion to Dismiss),不用全部诉求(Claim),一条就够了。 一条活下来,案件进入证据开示。 证据开示是什么?不是法庭辩论,是取证。 法院命令 Strategy 交出:Saylor 的内部邮件。 董事会对 STRC 目标受众的讨论。 STRK/STRC 内部定价模型,Saylor 和承销商关于"这个产品到底卖给谁"的沟通。 这些材料一旦进入公开记录,不需要判决。 光是尴尬就足够杀人了。 这就是为什么 90%以上的证券集体诉讼以和解收场。 不是被告认输,是被告算了一笔账: 和解赔钱是一次性的,是可控的,封口的。 证据开示,不可控的,每一个内部邮件都可能变成下一个新闻头条。 这不是法律计算,这是风险计算。 实打实的案例。 瑞幸咖啡(Luckin Coffee),2020年,3亿美元销售造假。原告起诉,瑞幸否认,法律上各种辩护。 然后案件要进入证据开示了。 随后爆出 1.75 亿美元天价和解。 没等到判决。是证据开示的威胁,就让他们不得不掏出天价和解费。 再看我们的主角自己——MSTR 在 2000 年已经吃过一轮。 一份虚假收入报告,让市值一天蒸发 110 亿。 随后引发集体诉讼,索赔金额超 6 亿美元,最后和解。 再看美国 2025 年全国数据: 证券集体诉讼中位数和解金 1730 万美元,创三十年新高。全年总和解金超 30 亿美元。 2000 年的 MSTR 是一家软件公司。 2026 年的 Strategy 是全球最大的 BTC 持有者。850,000 个币。 这次的标的比 2000 年大三个数量级。 这些闻到血腥味的律所不会被几亿美金打发。 他们绝对会要历史级别的和解金。 而Saylor 的嘴!他的播客!他的"退休收入机器"!他的"月度收入机器"(monthly income machine)! 给原告律师提供了这辈子最丰盛的靶子。 最后在看这个脆弱的市场。 2026年5月底,Strategy 卖了 32 个 BTC。 就 32 个,0.0038% 的持仓,价值 250 万美元。 BTC 应声暴跌,砸向 60,000 美元。 一个管理 850,000 BTC 的公司,卖掉了万分之一的持仓。 市场反应是什么?崩了。 不是技术面崩。不是宏观崩。是信心崩了。 明白了吗? 市场不是被那 32 个 BTC 砸下去的。是被"Strategy 在卖币"这五个字砸下去的。 Saylor 花了四年建立的人设——永不售出,永不,永远——32 个币就碎了。 现在你告诉我: 如果 250 万美元的公司开支就让他卖币,那要支付不低于六亿美金的法律和解金,他还会不会卖? 信心是金融市场的血液。 集体诉讼是放血的刀子。 不需要割到动脉。一个伤口。一次证据开示。32 个币。就够了。 我们不需要等到判决,你只需要等到不确定性的那一刻。 那就是现在即将要发生的事。 #STRC# #MicroStrategy# #MSTR# #Saylor# #BTC# #Bitcoin# #ClassAction# #集体诉讼# #证券欺诈# #和解# #Discovery# #证据开示# #LuckinCoffee# #瑞幸# #币圈# #Crypto#
显示更多
0
38
39
2
转发到社区
🚨 WTF?! President Trump reveals the woman who walked by the White House and sued him to block the ballroom national security project is also involved in OTHER litigation around DC Throw the case out! “She is highly litigious, a serial plaintiff, and said she was bothered in her walking by the White House, but didn't state her involvement in numerous places around D.C. Why then is she involved in litigation on other Developments in far distant parts of D.C. Is she walking there, too? How is she walking on a totally closed street at the Treasury Building — Nobody is allowed to walk there? She never saw a Building, because there is no Building there.“
显示更多
0
164
9.7K
2.7K
转发到社区
When Wall Street gets involved in our courts, North Carolina families and employers pay the price. Third Party Litigation Investment increases legal costs that drive up insurance and healthcare expenses. Support H315 to protect affordability and keep North Carolina competitive.
显示更多
universal sign someone's been through litigation before: they really prefer a phone call over everything else
0
34
9.9K
331
转发到社区
Crypto exchanges bankrupt Mt Gox, Quadriga, Voyager, Celsius, BlockFi, FTX.. DeFi solutions gone LUNA/UST.. Cold wallets hacked Coldcard.. There is NO safe solution You ALWAYS carry high risk to lose funds The only real mitigation is a return that justifies the risk taken
显示更多
0
11
44
1
转发到社区
𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦 𝗜𝗦 𝗠𝗨𝗖𝗛 𝗕𝗜𝗚𝗚𝗘𝗥 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗡 “𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗔𝗚𝗢𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗬 𝗨𝗦𝗘 𝗔𝗜.” President Donald Trump’s new Executive Order signals a fundamental change in defense acquisition: contractors will increasingly be expected to prove where critical materials, components, equipment, and software originate—through subcontractors and toward the raw-material source. The Pentagon wants to see the defense supply chain, identify where an adversary could interrupt it, and make prohibited foreign sourcing harder to excuse. The order directs the Department of Defense to: • Map designated critical supply chains. • Obtain hierarchical bills of materials showing what is inside a defense product, who supplied it, and where it originated. • Extend visibility beyond prime contractors into lower-tier suppliers. • Identify foreign dependencies, bottlenecks, sole-source suppliers, concentration risks, and single points of failure. • Use AI to analyze acquisition data and expose connections conventional contract reviews may miss. • Accelerate qualification of alternative sources and materials. Beginning January 1, 2027, certain waivers involving covered materials from prohibited sources will become substantially harder to obtain. Contractors seeking waivers may need approved mitigation plans showing how the dependency will be reduced or removed. Fraud, deliberate misrepresentation, or willful failure to implement an approved plan could result in contractual remedies and possible referral to the Attorney General. Restrictions under 10 U.S.C. §4872 concern designated sensitive materials from China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, including certain specialty metals, rare-earth elements, permanent magnets, and tungsten-related materials. But one distinction matters: 𝗔𝗜 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗕𝗘𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗔𝗨𝗧𝗛𝗢𝗥𝗜𝗭𝗘𝗗 𝗧𝗢 𝗗𝗘𝗖𝗜𝗗𝗘 𝗜𝗡𝗗𝗘𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗟𝗬 𝗪𝗛𝗜𝗖𝗛 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗣𝗔𝗡𝗜𝗘𝗦 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗧𝗥𝗨𝗦𝗧𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗛𝗬. AI will help map and analyze supply-chain vulnerabilities. Human officials retain responsibility for waivers, mitigation plans, contracting actions, and enforcement. President Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth deserve recognition for this determination to expose hidden dependencies and strengthen the industrial foundation behind the American warfighter. Now comes the decisive test: implementation. AI cannot map what contractors cannot identify, subcontractors will not disclose, or suppliers report inaccurately. 𝗦𝗨𝗣𝗣𝗟𝗬-𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗜𝗡 𝗠𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗔𝗗𝗠𝗜𝗡𝗜𝗦𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗜𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘. 𝗜𝗧 𝗜𝗦 𝗔 𝗧𝗘𝗦𝗧 𝗢𝗙 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗦𝗬𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗠 𝗕𝗘𝗛𝗜𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗪𝗔𝗥𝗙𝗜𝗚𝗛𝗧𝗘𝗥 𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗦𝗨𝗥𝗩𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗧𝗔𝗖𝗧 𝗪𝗜𝗧𝗛 𝗪𝗔𝗥. “Don’t sell me hype and call it readiness. Prove it before you put a soldier’s life behind it.” — Linda Restrepo Editor-in-Chief, N360™ — Sovereign Intelligence & National Security Technologies #DefenseSupplyChain# #ArtificialIntelligence# #DefenseIndustrialBase# #NationalSecurity# #MilitaryReadiness#
显示更多