Search for: "Uber v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 738
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2014, 8:26 am
Ehret v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 1:27 am
Common Pleas Judge Linda Carpenter’s Order in Blount v. [read post]
22 Jun 2021, 6:13 am
“Uber v. [read post]
11 May 2017, 10:40 pm
An Uber driverless Ford Fusion in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 7:45 am
Written as a means of codifying the California Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2023, 2:01 pm
In a recent case, Freyer v. [read post]
4 Mar 2018, 10:25 am
Despite the fact that both Uber and Otto deny the allegations, Uber fired Levandowski shortly after Waymo filed their lawsuit. [read post]
11 Oct 2016, 5:41 am
XYZ Two Way Radio Service v. [read post]
11 May 2017, 5:35 am
As such, it could enjoy the freedom to provide its services and not be subject to the relevant local regulations of the various Member States regarding taxi services.As to the final question, readers will be aware that in certain Member States there has been some resistance towards accepting that Uber can provide its services there. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 5:39 pm
In Adolph v. [read post]
6 Jan 2019, 8:24 pm
, Wellman v. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 10:23 am
Moreover, a motion for a class-action against Uber, also stemming from the judicial district of California, was recently granted (Douglas O’Connor, et al., v. [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 11:32 am
Drivers for Uber and Lyft claimed they are employees, not independent contractors. [read post]
24 May 2018, 7:08 am
In the 2010 case of Nason v. [read post]
24 May 2018, 7:08 am
In the 2010 case of Nason v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 1:27 am
Common Pleas Judge Linda Carpenter’s Order in Blount v. [read post]
16 Mar 2016, 9:41 am
The court first dismissed claims based on Uber’s alleged provision of taxicab services in violation of local and state regulations, which themselves didn’t provide for private causes of action. in Sandoz Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. [read post]
30 Oct 2016, 6:36 pm
Last summer, the California Labor Commission ruled in Uber v Berwick that Uber workers in that state were employees, not contractors, based on the broad basis of control exerted by the company. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 2:01 pm
Uber Techs., Inc., 893 F.3d 53, 61–64 (1st Cir. 2018); Nicosia v. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 6:49 am
On January 2, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its first decision of 2019: Heller v. [read post]
