Search for: "Minor v. F. C. I" Results 221 - 240 of 943
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2015, 5:04 am by Jon Gelman
As the Supreme Court explained:[I]n determining who are “employees” under the Act, common law employee categories or employer-employee classifications under other statutes are not of controlling significance. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 9:15 am by Schachtman
  For instance, a third factor C could be causing both A and B. [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 5:30 am
”  (Relying on Drake v. 3M, 134 F.3d 878 (7th Cir. 1998) (white employee may sue under Title VII based on discrimination resulting from his friendship with black co-workers). [read post]
8 Sep 2021, 7:20 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Frosty Bites Distribution, LLC, 369 F.3d 1197 (11th Cir. 2004), or the colors of pills in Inwood v. [read post]
14 Jan 2008, 6:20 am
Section 4 (c), on the other hand, protects the surviving spouse and minor children from having the homestead transferred out from under them without the consent of both spouses. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 7:27 am by Eugene Volokh
Even though the standards of the law are borrowed largely from similar laws related to the distribution of sexually themed materials to minors (see Ginsberg v. [read post]