Search for: "Taylor Made Express, Inc." Results 121 - 140 of 183
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Feb 2014, 6:01 pm by Joy Waltemath
It also cited the fact that the employee herself waited a few days before resigning as evidence that a reasonable person would not have felt compelled to resign under the circumstances, perhaps overlooking the evidence that the employee did, in fact, resign (Menzie v Ann Taylor Retail, Inc.). [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 1:27 pm
It is also a great lesson in record keeping in the current environment of digital records.Though the extent and application of the normative choices made by Chancellor Strine may be questioned, and strongly (e.g., Tekni-Plex, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2013, 3:33 pm by Employment Lawyers
  According to her formal complaint, Complainant was still known as a male at that time, having not yet made the transition to being a female. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 6:00 am by EEM
 OUP, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley have embargo periods ranging from 18-24 months, so their journals may or may not qualify! [read post]
28 Jan 2013, 11:46 am by Schachtman
Tenn. 1963) (Taylor, C.J.) [read post]
14 Jan 2013, 11:30 pm by Dan Flynn
” “Information about any implicated farms is made available to authorities, and re-inspections can be done,” he continued. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 8:08 am by Terry Hart
The private right that copyright law secures is what advances the public’s interest in new expressive rights. [read post]
23 Oct 2012, 8:08 am by Terry Hart
The private right that copyright law secures is what advances the public’s interest in new expressive rights. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 1:20 pm by NFS Esq.
(Opinion by Liu, J. expressing the unanimous view of the court.) [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 6:52 am by INFORRM
Speaker: William F Patry (Chief Copyright Counsel, Google Inc.) [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 12:07 pm
” But the probate court again expressed that it did not have jurisdiction over claims of adverse title.*2 Thereafter, counsel for the widow again stated that the parties “all agreed to stipulate as to the amount and nature of the property, that [this] was proper and then they have claims that their two pieces of property—the bank’s one [money-market account] and [the parents’] four [pieces of contested property][—]are not part of the estate. [read post]
25 Jan 2012, 6:42 am by emagraken
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786 (1993), and discussed in Taylor v. [read post]