Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 3821 - 3840
of 15,305
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Oct 2019, 6:14 am
§ 15A-1002(b) (2017). [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:10 am
C. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 2:39 am
(c) Deviation from Current Practices. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 11:00 pm
In Case Nintendo v PC Box C-355/12 [Kat Posts here], the CJEU explained that Art 6 is to be interpreted broadly and "includes application of an access control or protection process, such as encryption, scrambling or other transformation of the work". [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 9:00 am
The Court held (a) Premcor had adequately pled fact to withstand a defense that the petroleum exclusion barred the claims; (b) Premcor could not simultaneously plead 107 and 113 claims, dismissing its cost recovery claims inasmuch as Premcor had settled its claims with the State of Illinois; and (c) the contribution protection Apex Oil obtained in its settlement with the State of Illinois included CERCLA claims barred Premcor’s claims. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 7:56 am
§ 1391(c)(3) (stating that a defendant who is not a resident in the United States may be sued in any judicial district). [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 8:29 pm
The Court in Grant v. [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 2:46 pm
The Circuit Judge took into account that under a secure tenancy a landlord would have an implied right of access to carry out works to avoid injury ( McAuley v Bristol CC (1992) QB 134 and Lee v Leeds CC (2002) 1 WLR 1488 ). [read post]
29 Sep 2019, 2:35 pm
” Microsoft Corp. v. i4i L. [read post]
28 Sep 2019, 9:13 am
Cojocar v. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 11:47 am
Part B: Does the worker perform work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business? [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 6:00 am
Trying to nullify state capture. [read post]
27 Sep 2019, 2:49 am
Under United States v. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 3:21 pm
B – The worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 9:43 am
The judge relied heavily on the reasoning in Gillies v Goldman Sachs Canada Inc., 2000 BCSC 355 (CanLII) where the British Columbia Supreme Court provided a list of factors that help determine if an employee has a reasonable expectation of entitlement to a bonus: (a) whether a bonus was received in prior years; (b) whether bonuses were required in order to remain competitive with other employers; (c) whether bonuses were historically awarded and the employer had ever… [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 6:30 am
New York State's §75-b of the State's Civil Service Law bars a public employer's taking “adverse personnel actions” against a public employee if the employee reports what he reasonably believe to be a violation of a law, rule, or regulation by his public employer to a governmental body. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 6:30 am
New York State's §75-b of the State's Civil Service Law bars a public employer's taking “adverse personnel actions” against a public employee if the employee reports what he reasonably believe to be a violation of a law, rule, or regulation by his public employer to a governmental body. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 6:57 am
In Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 6:47 am
Application of Dynamex’s A-B-C employment test to the franchise model will likely result in most franchisors being deemed the employer of its California franchisees’ employees. [read post]
