Search for: "Person v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc." Results 181 - 200 of 378
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Aug 2014, 9:22 pm by H. Scott Leviant
El Torito Restaurants, Inc. (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 723, 734; Dunbar v. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 6:45 am by Joy Waltemath
Specifically, Greenspring asked the appeals court to follow the Eighth Circuit’s holding in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc v RLI Insurance Co. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 8:55 am
Wal-mart Stores, Inc., 455 Mass. 91 (2009), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reinstated a $1 million punitive damage jury verdict for a woman who sued her employer, Wal-mart, for discrimination in violation of Chapter 151. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 1:59 pm by Teresa Boyle-Vellucci
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., plaintiff Barry Boles worked for Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for approximately ten years. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 7:44 am
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., it was the doorway itself the plaintiff alleged to be defective and dangerous, and accused the store of failing to warn her about it. [read post]
27 May 2014, 5:04 pm by Thomas Kaufman
In the intervening years, class action jurisprudence seemed to take a step away from this thinking, spurred by the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 1:49 am by Andrew Trask
The court also pointed out that–contrary to the requirements of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 3:38 pm by Law Lady
WAL-MART STORES EAST, L.P., Appellee. 5th District.Venue -- Where settlement agreement, which had settled foreclosure action by mortgagor assigning to mortgagee 50 percent of the net proceeds awarded for damages in mortgagor's action against its insurance carrier in Miami-Dade County, contained mandatory venue selection provision requiring any litigation between mortgagor and mortgagee to be tried in Osceola County, trial court erred in denying motion to enforce the venue… [read post]
15 Jan 2014, 8:47 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
In its ruling, the Court of Appeals confirmed that, because Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 42 was “patterned after Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, federal decisions and authorities interpreting current federal class action requirements are instructive,” including Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Dec 2013, 7:22 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
In support of the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a)(2), Plaintiffs cited directly to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Oct 2013, 6:21 am
The Third Circuit rejected plaintiffs’ arguments that the district court abused its discretion by overstepping its authority in declining to certify a settlement class and in misapplying Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Oct 2013, 6:21 am
The Third Circuit rejected plaintiffs’ arguments that the district court abused its discretion by overstepping its authority in declining to certify a settlement class and in misapplying Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Oct 2013, 3:56 am by Lorene Park
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]