Search for: "Martinez v. Combs"
Results 1 - 20
of 86
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2022, 10:07 am
Martinez! [read post]
16 Dec 2019, 11:43 am
Combs (“Martinez”). [read post]
17 Oct 2019, 10:10 am
In examining the question of joint employment status, the Ninth Circuit considered the three definitions for employment that the California Supreme Court applied to joint employment claims in Martinez v. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 7:34 pm
Mei Ling v. [read post]
15 May 2019, 4:30 am
The prior employment test came from a case called Martinez v. [read post]
3 May 2019, 6:51 am
The district court recognized that “no binding decision ha[d] addressed the standard applicable to determining whether a franchisor is an employer of a franchisee,” and “in the absence of controlling authority” it applied the standard from Martinez v Combs, with the gloss of Patterson v Domino’s Pizza, LLC . [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 4:00 am
Bement (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1075, 1084 (Reynolds), abrogated on other grounds in Martinez v. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 2:45 pm
Adding to this confusion, a 2017 decision by the Fourth Circuit in Salinas v. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 3:19 pm
See Garcia v. [read post]
26 Oct 2018, 3:05 pm
“Suffer or permit to work” definition of employment In Martinez v. [read post]
6 Oct 2018, 12:43 am
Bement and Martinez v. [read post]
16 Jul 2018, 2:28 pm
Borello & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
7 May 2018, 3:58 pm
Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35, 64 (2010) (“Martinez”). [read post]
7 May 2018, 3:58 pm
Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35, 64 (2010) (“Martinez”). [read post]
5 May 2018, 5:31 pm
In 2010, in Martinez v. [read post]
2 May 2018, 10:09 am
Their motion for class certification argued that, under Martinez v. [read post]
2 May 2018, 6:57 am
Combs. [read post]
1 May 2018, 2:19 pm
Combs. [read post]
1 May 2018, 2:19 pm
Combs. [read post]
1 May 2018, 1:02 pm
Combs, 49 Cal.4th 35, 64 (2010) (“Martinez”). [read post]
