cory andrews podcast appearances and mentions

Episode 5: Playoff Team and Awards Predictions with Cory Andrews

Play Episode Listen Later Mar 29, 2021 87:49

I brought in my good friend Cory Andrews to discuss who we think will make the postseason in 2021 and we also make our predictions for MVP, CY Young, Rookie of the Year, Manager of the Year and Comeback Player of the Year. Some of our answers may surprise you so make sure to listen along with us. Follow him on Twitter @CorkaCola1 to get his newest updates for his podcast and streams on Twitch! Regular season is just DAYS away. Hope you enjoy the episode and make sure to comeback for the next episode! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

predictions twitch playoffs awards mvp rookies regular cy young comeback player cory andrews

Emulex Corp v. Varjabedian - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast

Play Episode Listen Later May 30, 2019 10:32

On April 23, 2019, just one week after argument, the Supreme Court decided Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, a case involving a circuit split regarding Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and whether it supports an inferred private right of action based on negligence or scienter. Emulex Corp. is a computer component seller that entered into a merger agreement with Avago Technologies Wireless Manufacturing. In the merger agreement, Avago offered to pay $8 per share, which reflected a premium of 26.4% on the price of Emulex stock the day before the merger was announced. Emulex filed with the Commission a public recommendation statement supporting the tender offer, recommending that Emulex shareholders tender their shares and noting that that Emulex shareholders would receive a premium on their stock. The statement also included a summary of a “fairness opinion” generated by Goldman Sachs, indicating its view that the tender offer was fair to shareholders. Omitted from the recommendation statement, however, was a one-page premium analysis by Goldman indicating that the takeover premium offered by Avago was actually below average, though within the normal range for mergers involving similar companies. The merger went forward, but thereafter Gary Varjabedian and other Emulex shareholders collectively brought suit against Emulex under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act, alleging that omission of the premium analysis page rendered the recommendation statement materially misleading. Emulex moved to dismiss, arguing that the facts alleged by plaintiffs did not sufficiently support the scienter required under Section 14(e). The district court agreed and ruled for Emulex but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. Although five other federal circuit courts of appeals had interpreted Section 14(e) to require scienter, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that the better reading of the provision in light of its legislative history required merely a showing negligence and not scienter.The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 supports an inferred private right of action based on the negligent misstatement or omission made in connection with a tender offer. During oral argument, however, the Justices questioned whether certiorari had properly been granted, as the courts below had not thoroughly considered whether Section 14(e) authorizes a private right of action at all. Indeed, just over one week after oral argument, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion dismissing the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted. To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, Senior Litigation Counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation.

court supreme court decision commission corporations goldman sachs appeals goldman corp litigation federal court justices ninth circuit omitted securities exchange act senior litigation counsel avago washington legal foundation cory andrews securities & antitrust

Emulex Corp v. Varjabedian - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast

Play Episode Listen Later May 30, 2019 10:32

On April 23, 2019, just one week after argument, the Supreme Court decided Emulex Corp. v. Varjabedian, a case involving a circuit split regarding Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and whether it supports an inferred private right of action based on negligence or scienter. Emulex Corp. is a computer component seller that entered into a merger agreement with Avago Technologies Wireless Manufacturing. In the merger agreement, Avago offered to pay $8 per share, which reflected a premium of 26.4% on the price of Emulex stock the day before the merger was announced. Emulex filed with the Commission a public recommendation statement supporting the tender offer, recommending that Emulex shareholders tender their shares and noting that that Emulex shareholders would receive a premium on their stock. The statement also included a summary of a “fairness opinion” generated by Goldman Sachs, indicating its view that the tender offer was fair to shareholders. Omitted from the recommendation statement, however, was a one-page premium analysis by Goldman indicating that the takeover premium offered by Avago was actually below average, though within the normal range for mergers involving similar companies. The merger went forward, but thereafter Gary Varjabedian and other Emulex shareholders collectively brought suit against Emulex under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act, alleging that omission of the premium analysis page rendered the recommendation statement materially misleading. Emulex moved to dismiss, arguing that the facts alleged by plaintiffs did not sufficiently support the scienter required under Section 14(e). The district court agreed and ruled for Emulex but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. Although five other federal circuit courts of appeals had interpreted Section 14(e) to require scienter, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that the better reading of the provision in light of its legislative history required merely a showing negligence and not scienter.The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 supports an inferred private right of action based on the negligent misstatement or omission made in connection with a tender offer. During oral argument, however, the Justices questioned whether certiorari had properly been granted, as the courts below had not thoroughly considered whether Section 14(e) authorizes a private right of action at all. Indeed, just over one week after oral argument, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion dismissing the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted. To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, Senior Litigation Counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation.

court supreme court decision commission corporations goldman sachs appeals goldman corp litigation federal court justices ninth circuit omitted securities exchange act senior litigation counsel avago washington legal foundation cory andrews securities & antitrust

Leadership and Wellness with Yvette Kell

In Your Business with UMSL | Business

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 6, 2018 16:41

In this episode we speak with Yvette Kell who is the Director of Campus Recreation at UMSL. We talk about the importance of leadership, the role that wellness plays in your performance inside and outside of school, and how to get involved on campus with opportunities that will help you with your future career. Host: Radek Chupka Produced By: Radek Chupka, Cory Andrews, Daniel Litz, and Nick Boyd About the Speaker: Yvette Kell is the Director of the UMSL Campus Recreation and Wellness Center where she oversees over 100 students and 8 professional staff. Yvette also recently received her PhD in Education Leadership.

director leadership phd wellness wellness center kell education leadership umsl campus recreation cory andrews

TDL Fitness S2 Episode 16 - The New Human Condition

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2018 50:17

In this bumper episode we explore the new and groundbreaking work conducted by TDL Fitness titled 'The New Human Condition'. We assess how the human race is flawed and how we can all live happy and fit and free simply by choice. In this landmark episode we explain the new human condition as created by TDL Fitness. This episode features regular guest Cory Andrews. For more Cory: https://www.instagram.com/totally_not_a_black_guy/ For more TDL Fitness: www.facebook.com/tdl.voicefit.group www.twitter.com/tdlsocial www.instagram.com/tdl_tony www.patreon.com/tdlpodcast tdlfitness@outlook.com www.TDLFitness.com

fitness human condition new human cory andrews

TDL Fitness S2 Episode 10 - Pursuing Happiness

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Sep 18, 2017 77:27

In this episode we celebrate 100 TDL Fitness articles with pursuing what happiness is and what we can do to achieve it. We explore what people do wrong when chasing after happiness and how to know when it is time to do some soul searching and how to make it easier done than said. In this episode we are joined by returning guest Cory Andrews. The 100th article can be found here; http://www.tdlfitness.com/single-post/2017/09/14/TDL-Fitness-100-Its-All-In-The-Mind For more Cory check him out here; Instagram: www.instagram.com/totally_not_a_black_guy/?hl=en Remember to follow us on social media: Instagram: www.instagram.com/tdl_tony Facebook: www.facebook.com/tdl.voicefit.group Twitter: www.twitter.com/tdlsocial Support the show on Patreon; www.patreon.com/tdlpodcast In loving memory of Gene Wilder

fitness gene wilder pursuing happiness cory andrews

State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. U.S. ex rel. Rigsby - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2016 13:51

On November 1, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. U.S. ex rel. Rigsby. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. (State Farm) administered separate wind and flood damage policies in the Gulf Coast area at the time of Hurricane Katrina. In general, State Farm was responsible for paying wind damage from its own assets, while federal funds would pay for flood damage. The Rigsby sisters were State Farm claims adjusters who allegedly discovered in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina that, with respect to properties covered under both wind and flood policies, State Farm was unlawfully classifying wind damage as flood damage in order to offload the cost of payment onto the federal government. Rigsby sued on behalf of the United States under the provisions of the federal False Claims Act (FCA), and continued to litigate the case after the United States declined to intervene. The district court focused discovery and trial on a single bellwether claim, and the jury found an FCA violation and awarded damages. -- Both sides appealed, with the Rigsbys (classified under the FCA as “relators”) seeking additional discovery to uncover and pursue other similar FCA violations by State Farm--and State Farm arguing, among other things, that the case should be dismissed because the Rigsbys’ counsel had violated the FCA’s seal requirement, by disclosing the existence of the FCA lawsuit to various news outlets. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit acknowledged the seal violation but concluded after applying a multi-factor test that the breach did not warrant dismissal here. -- The question now before the Supreme Court is what standard governs the decision whether to dismiss a relator's claim for violation of the False Claims Act's seal requirement, an issue on which the federal circuit courts of appeals have split three ways. -- To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, who is senior litigation counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation.

united states court supreme court argument appeals hurricane katrina gulf coast state farm fca casualty fifth circuit rigsby false claims act state farm fire washington legal foundation cory andrews

TDL Fitness Episode 17 - Managing Expectations

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Feb 12, 2016 44:06

In this episode we assess our expectations about ourselves with regards to fitness and health, and we explore whether our expectations are realistic or not. We explain how advertising has ruined our ability to manage our expectations. We also help you manage your expectations by giving tips about how to expect something that will happen and is good for you. This episode welcomes back return guest Cory Andrews.

fitness managing expectations cory andrews

TDL Fitness Episode 13 - The Balancing Act

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Jan 15, 2016 61:04

In this episode we explore the importance of balance in the physical and mental sense. We look at how important it is to achieve balance at work, in the gym, in sport and how we can teach ourselves to accept its importance and how to get it. In this episode we are joined by returning guest Cory Andrews

fitness balancing act cory andrews

DIRECTV v. Imburgia - Post-Decision SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast

Play Episode Listen Later Dec 17, 2015 10:38

On December 14, 2015, the Supreme Court decided DIRECTV v. Imburgia. This case involves a class action lawsuit against DIRECTV by various California customers. Among other things, the agreement between DIRECTV and its customers contained a waiver of any right by either party to undertake class arbitration, unless “the law of your state” made such waivers unenforceable. At that time class arbitration waivers were unenforceable under California law, but in a subsequent case the United States Supreme Court held that this California rule was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Concluding that the parties had intended to apply the rule as it existed prior to the Supreme Court decision, California trial and appellate courts refused to enforce the arbitration provision. The question before the Supreme Court was whether the FAA permitted this outcome; namely, the application of state law that had since been preempted by the FAA. -- By a vote of 6-3, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the California Court of Appeals and remanded the case. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court, holding that the arbitration provision must be enforced because the California appellate court’s interpretation was preempted by the FAA. -- Justice Breyer’s opinion was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Alito, and Kagan. Justice Thomas filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Sotomayor joined. -- To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, who is Senior Litigation Counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation.

california court supreme court decision ruth bader ginsburg appeals faa concluding united states supreme court samuel alito chief justice sonia sotomayor directv stephen breyer kagan justice thomas california court senior litigation counsel justices scalia washington legal foundation cory andrews

DIRECTV v. Imburgia - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast

Play Episode Listen Later Nov 6, 2015 12:10

On October 6, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in DIRECTV v. Imburgia. This case involves a class action lawsuit which argues that DIRECTV improperly charged early termination fees to its customers. The question is whether the California Court of Appeal erred by holding that a reference to state law in an arbitration agreement governed by the Federal Arbitration Act requires the application of state law preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. -- To discuss the case, we have Cory Andrews, who is Senior Litigation Counsel at the Washington Legal Foundation.

supreme court appeal argument directv california court federal arbitration act senior litigation counsel washington legal foundation cory andrews

TDL Fitness Episode 3 - Why We Train

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 16, 2015 35:34

In this episode we focus exclusively on the motivation behind people training. We interview Tony de Lacey with return guest Cory Andrews. Any questions about the show please email us at tdlfitness@outlook.com

fitness train cory andrews

IHAV Episode 2 - England Vs Italian Football

The TDL Podcast

Play Episode Listen Later Oct 12, 2015 45:22

In this episode we look at the rise of Italian football with Juventus fan Cory Andrews as our guest and comparing the rise of Italian football teams with English teams not only in the leagues but in Europe. We also look at the national teams of English and Italian football and discussing the reasons behind the dominance of German football.

english europe england german italian juventus italian football cory andrews