Search for: "Person v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc."
Results 361 - 378
of 378
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Aug 2011, 2:00 pm
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 355 F.3d 1327, 1333 (Fed. [read post]
13 Mar 2013, 5:23 am
In Amgen Inc. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2014, 7:00 am
Unlike Wal-Mart Stores v Dukes, this was not a case that involved a policy calling for individual discretionary decisions. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 7:48 am
At the hearing, the parties argued that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 9:06 am
Over the past decade, the plaintiffs’ class action bar has been both innovator and activist in finding its way around defense-centric legal precedents – such as the more rigorous class action standards established in Wal-Mart-Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2018, 7:07 am
Noting that disparate impact claims under Title VII challenge “a facially neutral policy or practice that causes a disparate impact on a protected group, even if the employer has no intent to discriminate,” the court observed that Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:02 pm
The ordinary reasonable reader of the internet today would be a more cynical, and better informed, person than the man on the Clapham omnibus, and the time has come for remedies which take this into account. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 4:28 pm
This case is significant because it is the first known California appellate decision reviewing a trial verdict in an overtime misclassification case, where the trial court employed one of the purported “innovative procedural tools” (statistical sampling) to manage class action trials referenced by the California Supreme Court in Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2009, 11:56 am
Part V identifies key unresolved issues in the state courts. [read post]
20 Apr 2009, 3:27 am
Fred's Stores of Arkansas, Inc., No. 08-2346 (8th Cir. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 3:47 am
Apr. 17, 2009)(Unpub)Affirming dismissal of 59yo Store Mgr's age/discharge claim> Drake v. [read post]
11 Mar 2024, 9:01 pm
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the court referred to the SEC staff’s no-action letter process on shareholder proposals as a “we-know-it-when-we-see-it” approach. [read post]
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 8:55 am
Board of Trustees and City of Hayward v. [read post]
9 Oct 2006, 5:12 pm
After finding that the lead persons did not possess the authority to "assign" under the Act, the Board then found that the lead persons responsibly directed their line or crew members. [read post]
26 Feb 2024, 2:08 pm
Hilltop Group, Inc., et al v. [read post]
8 May 2024, 2:26 pm
In general, retirement income is secured through three sources: social security, retirement savings in qualified plans, and personal assets/investments held outside of qualified plans. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 11:20 am
King Billable Hour v. [read post]
