Search for: "Grant v. Superior Court" Results 3121 - 3140 of 6,581
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Sep 2014, 4:54 pm
A court, in interpreting a statute, should attempt to effectuate the attempt of the Legislature and is not free to legislate. in Pajak v Pajak, wherein the Court of Appeals held that the right to a divorce is statutorily created and since section 170 of the Domestic Relations Law did not provide for a defense to an action for divorce except upon the grounds of adultery, no defense could be offered to prevent plaintiff's claims of a right to a divorce on the ground of… [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 8:18 am by Joy Waltemath
Finding that the report — which resulted in the tech being rated “high risk” — communicated information bearing on his character, general reputation, or mode of living, and was used for employment purposes, the court granted the tech’s motion for summary judgment in this putative class action under the FCRA against Dish and Sterling Infosystems, the company that provided the background report (Ernst v Dish Network, LLC, September 22, 2014,… [read post]
20 Sep 2014, 11:07 am by Schachtman
The defendant on appeal cited to the unpublished Third Circuit opinion Court, Parker v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 7:42 am by Shea Denning
Turns out it also is apropos for this week’s court of appeals decision in State v. [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 9:06 am
Superior Court, supra, 57 Cal.2d at p. 455.) [read post]
17 Sep 2014, 4:00 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Wecht of the Pennsylvania Superior Court, the decision of the trial court judge granting summary judgment was reversed.Judge David N. [read post]
16 Sep 2014, 5:30 am by Daniel E. Cummins
”   Accordingly, the Superior Court ruled that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment and dismissing the Complaint.Anyone wishing to review this unpublished, non-precedential decision may click this LINK. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 12:53 pm by Epstein Becker Green
Prager of the Superior Court of California granted class certification as to a class of  approximately 21,000 current and former Apple retail and corporate employees on claims alleging Apple failed to provide timely meal and rest breaks as required under California Law. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 5:46 am
Brown, 2014 WL 4450430 (Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division 2014). [read post]
10 Sep 2014, 3:12 pm by Jon Sands
  The court first agreed, under Holland v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 1:01 pm by Minken Employment Lawyers
This question was considered in the recent Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision of Kimball v. [read post]