Search for: "Doe v. Doe "
Results 21 - 40
of 152,101
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Given the absence of a provision for prior approval — a finding that petitioner does not dispute — the Comptroller appropriately found that the agreements do not cover when or how petitioner worked overtime. [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 5:33 am
In Murthy v. [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 4:00 am
Justice Kavanaugh is quoting Justice Kennedy's concurrence in the judgment in Simon & Schuster v. [read post]
26 Jun 2024, 3:32 am
However, beware, that unlike one in H-1B status who may be able to keep on applying for extensions under AC 21, the shelf life of the L-1A status is 7 years, and 5 years for the L-1B status, as AC21 does not apply to L-1s. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 9:05 pm
Despite the Supreme Court ruling in Radovich v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 9:01 pm
§ 5-2-214). [4] Nat’l Ass’n of Industrial Bankers v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 6:20 pm
One does not develop a help desk from the bottom up--nor necessarily with a view to enlarging the primacy of human rights holders who tend to bear the consequences of adverse human rights impacts.[12] Instead, it tends to be more efficient to target those collective organs into which positive responsibility for the care and protection of human rights harms bearers authority are vested. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 3:07 pm
But five justices had rejected that theory in Williams v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 1:59 pm
The first case, Braidwood Management v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 1:29 pm
He is very good at what he does. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 12:59 pm
Another classmate, Emily Podolnick, responded to the Teitiota v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 12:22 pm
I was glad to see that the California Court of Appeal published its opinion in Luo v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 12:20 pm
One problem with pseudonymous litigation is the proliferation of Doe v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 12:00 pm
It gets the arbitration it wanted, but via a messy opinion that does not represent a clean approval of its TOS management practices. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 11:18 am
Furthermore, the PDP Project proposal must now include information on “intellectual property, exclusivity contracts or commercial agreements, including details of any agreements or restrictions on licensing or 3rd-party access to the technology” (Annex CX, article 8, V). [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 10:59 am
Here is the opinion in Tanner-Brown v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 9:56 am
(See Bostock v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 9:26 am
If you want another example, think of Jacobson v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 8:56 am
Alfaro Manzano v. [read post]
25 Jun 2024, 7:58 am
District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, State of Louisiana, et al. v. [read post]
