Search for: "The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. v Doe" Results 1 - 20 of 20
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Mar 2008, 6:07 am
Defendant: Telebay LLC Case Number: 3:2008cv01459 The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. et al v. [read post]
1 Sep 2015, 7:14 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The Neiman Marcus Decision While much has already been written about the Neiman Marcus opinion,[i] a few contextual details are in order. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 4:17 am by gmlevine
Omni Development is indistinguishable from the Neiman Marcus type of case, but distinguishable from Carlyle Group v. [read post]
8 Jun 2016, 7:14 am
She remains concerned that her personal information will be misused, but she does not claim that she or anyone else affected by the data breach has learned of any misuse to date.Khan v. [read post]
9 Dec 2011, 6:28 am by Gmlevine
Registrants have tried a number of ploys to escape forfeiture including pretending to be the complainant, Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 8:34 am
Holmes does not specify the amount or date of the fraudulent charge, nor does he allege the charge was unreimbursed or that he incurred bank fees or other monetary losses related to the charge. [read post]
7 Nov 2017, 6:24 am by Joy Waltemath
Neiman Marcus Group, Inc., the Ninth Circuit reiterated that a district court “‘has not merely the power but the duty to render a decree which will so far as possible eliminate the discriminatory effects of the past as well as bar like discrimination in the future. [read post]
10 Feb 2007, 6:02 pm
In a 1987 ADEA case from the Seventh Circuit, a thorough discussion of the word "voluntary," in the context of employee benefits, can be found.[17] In Henn, the defendant-employer made a onetime offer of early retirement to a group of employees, promising them "a severance payment of one year's salary, retirement benefits calculated as if the retiree had quit at 65, medical coverage for life as if the employee were still on the payroll, and some supplemental life… [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:30 am by Paul Karlsgodt
Neiman Marcus Group, LLC, 794 F. 3d 688 (7th Cir. 2015), where the panel held that the alleged facts supported the conclusion that the risk of harm in the form of identity theft was not just possible but was actually “certainly impending,” distinguishing it from the facts at issue in Clapper. [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 5:08 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  The dust-up in Delaware over fee-shifting bylaws got started in May 2014, when the Delaware Supreme Court in the ATP Tours, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 3:19 am by Kevin LaCroix
[v]   The SEC Certainly the majority of the federal activity on cyber security issues has come from the SEC. [read post]