Search for: "Brinker v. Brinker" Results 221 - 240 of 622
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 Apr 2012, 10:04 am by Staci Riordan
On April 12, 2012, after over three years and two rounds of briefing, the California Supreme Court issued the long-awaited decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
12 Aug 2008, 6:33 pm
California employers scored a major victory regarding meal and rest periods as the result of a new California Court of Appeals decision, Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
12 May 2011, 1:58 pm by EPSTEIN BECKER & GREEN, P.C.
Superior Court (review granted Oct. 22, 2008 (Brinker) and Brinkley v. [read post]
15 May 2012, 1:57 pm by Brian Gross
  The California Supreme Court recently released its long awaited decision in the class action case Brinker v. [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 10:24 am by Michael D. Thompson
Michael Kun, chair of EBG’s wage-hour practice group, was recently quoted by California Lawyer magazine regarding the impact of the California Supreme Court’s decision in Brinker v. [read post]
Michael Kun, chair of EBG’s wage-hour practice group, was recently quoted by California Lawyer magazine regarding the impact of the California Supreme Court’s decision in Brinker v. [read post]
12 May 2013, 9:39 pm by Thomas Kaufman
   However, the California Supreme Court issued a grant/hold review on the decision in light of its grant of review in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2008, 7:27 pm
Weideman On August 29, Plaintiff Adam Hohnbaum’s counsel filed the much anticipated petition for review before the California Supreme Court in the well-publicized meal period case Brinker v. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 1:35 pm by Thomas Kaufman
By Thomas Kaufman  (follow me on Twitter) As anticipated, today the California Supreme Court in Brinker v. [read post]
27 May 2014, 5:04 pm by Thomas Kaufman
  In a misunderstanding of a general class action principle discussed in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
29 Oct 2008, 8:36 pm
The court in Brinkley (out of the Second Appellate District), agreed with the holding of the appellate court in Brinker v. [read post]