Search for: "OXLEY v. STATE"
Results 261 - 280
of 649
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Aug 2014, 7:00 am
This month the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division III issued a ruling in Becker v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 8:41 am
The court said Fuqua filed a state suit and a second OSHA complaint after SVOX became a covered Nuance subsidiary; the DOL’s administrative law judge also found SOX could apply to retaliation Fuqua said occurred after Nuance acquired SVOX.Said the court: “The ‘formerly worked for’ definition of ‘employee’ is susceptible to the reading that an individual who formerly worked for an entity that is now public (whether he did so before or after the company… [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 1:41 pm
In SEC v. [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 9:04 am
United States, in which a commercial fisherman was prosecuted under the federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act for destroying undersized fish, and the amicus brief that Cato filed in the case. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 1:33 pm
In the upcoming case of Yates v. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 5:15 am
In the upcoming case of Yates v. [read post]
22 Jun 2014, 10:21 am
Team A v. [read post]
18 Jun 2014, 8:00 am
In Lawson v. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 11:54 am
On May 13, 2014, in Webb-Weber v. [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 6:05 am
” At the blog of the National Conference of State Legislatures, Lisa Soronen discusses the State and Local Legal Center’s amicus brief, as well as the issues at stake more broadly, in next Term’s North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
14 May 2014, 5:55 am
Although the “contributing factor” causation standard in Sarbanes-Oxley retaliation cases “is indeed meant to be quite broad and forgiving,” a discharged company president and CEO was unable to establish that his protected whistleblower activities were a contributing factor in his termination, the Fourth Circuit held. [read post]
2 May 2014, 12:28 pm
United States, 13-7451 (involving whether Sarbanes-Oxley’s “anti-shredding” prohibition can be used to go after small fry) were first-time relists last week. [read post]
2 May 2014, 1:11 am
In Lawson v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 1:11 am
In Lawson v. [read post]
2 May 2014, 1:11 am
In Lawson v. [read post]
1 May 2014, 9:05 pm
ICON and Highmark v. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 6:45 am
However, her gender discrimination claims under federal and state law could advance (Rock v Lifeline Systems Company, April 22, 2014, Bowler, M). [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 3:11 am
California and United States v. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 3:54 pm
United States, No. 13-7451. [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 3:00 pm
" United States v. [read post]
