Search for: "CALIFORNIA COMPANY v. STATE INDUSTRIAL COURT" Results 341 - 360 of 2,377
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Jan 2017, 4:50 pm by req@quintilone.com
Sprint Corporation, a Sprint Communications Company, L.P., et al., No. 2:14-cv- 02461-TLN-AC, pending before the Honorable Troy Nunley in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (the “Action”) Quintilone & Associates and a team of lawyer successfully reached a settlement of claims that Sprint violated various provisions of California’s wage and hour laws by, among other things, allegedly failing to:… [read post]
15 Jun 2019, 8:08 am by Cannabis Law Group
Appellate Courts Issue Conflicting Rulings on Cannabis and Bankruptcy That same month, the 9th DCA in Garvin v. [read post]
13 Jul 2022, 2:52 pm by Unknown
Federal Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2022.html Bird Industries, Inc v. [read post]
6 Dec 2016, 10:35 am by Florian Mueller
The Federal Circuit nevertheless affirmed the related §399 million part of the damages award in the first California Apple v. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 11:47 am by Anthony Zaller
  AB 5, which codifies the California Supreme Court’s ABC test for independent contractors as set forth in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Aug 2007, 4:50 pm
District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 10:00 am
The Court's first semi-blockbuster of the Term has Golden State crooks jumping for joy in the jails. [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 5:00 am by Beth Graham
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has upheld a nearly $63 million arbitration award that was issued against a California company owned by a foreign corporation. [read post]
16 Jan 2020, 11:34 am by John Lewis and Joseph S. Persoff
We blogged about the new California legislation and the TRO issued in Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. [read post]
2 Jul 2018, 6:14 pm by Eric Goldman
Today, the California Supreme Court reversed that ruling, seemingly restoring the status quo. [read post]