Search for: "Head v State"
Results 2381 - 2400
of 14,945
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Mar 2012, 5:40 pm
In Scherer v. [read post]
29 Mar 2016, 4:06 pm
There is a judgment on liability and quantum (Burrell v Clifford [2016] EWHC 294 (Ch)), although Mr Justice Mann’s earlier decision dismissing Mr Clifford’s strike out application on limitation and triviality grounds (Burrell v Clifford [2015] EWHC 2001 (Ch)) is arguably of wider importance. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 8:47 am
At the oral argument in CTS Corp. v. [read post]
5 Jun 2008, 3:29 am
The appointments clause of the United States Constitution requires that inferior officers be appointed either by the President of the United States, the courts of law or heads of departments. [read post]
16 Sep 2022, 12:22 pm
In United States v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 12:28 pm
Touhy v. [read post]
12 Nov 2014, 11:06 am
Equality bites.Mike McClainUnited States v. [read post]
12 Jun 2013, 7:59 am
A DHL Express employee who was terminated after an investigation revealed that “rogue” sales representatives had engaged in improper sales practices during his tenure heading up a sales territory was not entitled to receive a bonus, ruled the First Circuit (Weiss v DHL Express, Inc, June 3, 2013, Howard, J). [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 10:02 am
In yet another development in the closely watched case of Rizo v. [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 10:02 am
In yet another development in the closely watched case of Rizo v. [read post]
21 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that "Although extending the retractable head portion of the stretcher was no doubt part of [Petitioner's] job duties, the precipitating external event, i.e., the jamming of the retractable head section of the stretcher, was sudden, unexpected and not a risk in his ordinary employment duties" and appeared to have been caused by a malfunction in the equipment. [read post]
21 Aug 2024, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that "Although extending the retractable head portion of the stretcher was no doubt part of [Petitioner's] job duties, the precipitating external event, i.e., the jamming of the retractable head section of the stretcher, was sudden, unexpected and not a risk in his ordinary employment duties" and appeared to have been caused by a malfunction in the equipment. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 9:01 pm
United States. [read post]
5 Jun 2024, 4:10 am
In United States v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 7:04 am
During his arraignment in Lawrence District Court, he kept his head tilted downward and did not talk. [read post]
27 May 2013, 11:47 am
” Head v. [read post]
7 May 2010, 5:00 am
Clancy v. [read post]
31 Jul 2016, 6:23 am
The case of Estate of Smith v. [read post]
10 Dec 2016, 2:41 am
Additional Resources: Suarez v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 2:16 pm
With the increasing likelihood that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. [read post]
