Search for: "Bias v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc"
Results 81 - 100
of 105
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2013, 4:20 am
For example, in Muhammad v Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, a federal court sua sponte sanctioned an employee’s attorney who tried to avoid summary judgment by “disingenuously” arguing that an unpleaded gender bias claim had merit and could be pursued simply because the employee checked the Title VII box on his form complaint (WDNY 2012). [read post]
6 Sep 2011, 9:05 am
Given the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Dec 2011, 7:08 pm
Supreme Court's holding in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 11:11 am
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 166 F.3d 1317, 1323 (11th Cir. 1999)). [read post]
25 Oct 2013, 3:56 am
The ADA does not require an employer to place an employee on permanent light duty or give other workers an employee’s assignments to accommodate a physical impairment (Josey v Wal-Mart Stores East, LP). [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 7:07 am
Noting that disparate impact claims under Title VII challenge “a facially neutral policy or practice that causes a disparate impact on a protected group, even if the employer has no intent to discriminate,” the court observed that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Aug 2011, 1:40 pm
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 131 S. [read post]
12 Jan 2009, 4:06 am
Wal-Mart Stores4th Cir.Reasonableness Not Required For Participation Retaliation ClaimCumbie vs. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 12:24 pm
Many of the court’s reasons sprang from the Supreme Court’s opinion in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2015, 8:19 am
Supreme Court decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 6:44 am
The case is Heimeshoff v Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc (Dkt No 12-729) In an unpublished opinion, the Second Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision that the plaintiff’s claim for long-term disability benefits was untimely because she filed her action outside the policy-prescribed, three-year statute of limitations period. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 10:33 am
Supreme Court in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
7 May 2014, 10:10 am
Second, as to the case itself, the district court denied certification due to a lack of commonality under Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 2:30 pm
Supreme Court’s 1997 decision in Amchem v. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 10:11 am
The Court did not swear at all by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2017, 7:26 am
In so holding, the court revisited and departed from another judge’s interpretation of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Mar 2008, 6:00 am
: (Afro-IP),If education and pricing policy fail, says Adobe in Nigeria, we can still sue: (Afro-IP),South African arm of Chrysler objects to advertisement by Indian vehicle maker Mahindra and Mahindra that uses the term "jeep": (Afro-IP), (Spicy IP),Kenya’s call for anti-counterfeit legislation… amongst other changes: (Afro-IP),Kenya: Shared computer use raises privacy, confidentiality issues: (Afro-IP)AustraliaChanges to grace period for trade mark renewal:… [read post]
16 Apr 2017, 3:46 am
In so holding, the court revisited and departed from another judge’s interpretation of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 2:52 pm
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 08-10761 (11th Cir. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 4:28 pm
This case is significant because it is the first known California appellate decision reviewing a trial verdict in an overtime misclassification case, where the trial court employed one of the purported “innovative procedural tools” (statistical sampling) to manage class action trials referenced by the California Supreme Court in Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
