Search for: "West v. United Parcel Services"
Results 21 - 40
of 54
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2017, 1:40 am
”Hendrickson v United Parcel Service, DOCKET NO. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:56 am
City of West Hollywood, 45 Cal.4th 116 (2008) (“Save Tara”), and RiverWatch v. [read post]
8 Sep 2016, 7:36 am
Hitchcock and Cherokee Nation v. [read post]
30 Sep 2015, 7:26 pm
United Parcel Service, leaving employers to wonder how that guidance applies to their workplace and their employees. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 11:00 pm
See United Parcel Serv. [read post]
12 May 2015, 5:12 am
United Parcel Service, No. 2011 CI-07922 (Tex., Bexar Co. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 4:50 am
United Parcel Service? [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:27 pm
Evans v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 9:34 am
By Glen Hansen In Brandt Trust v. [read post]
10 Aug 2014, 8:00 pm
The staff of the City’s Planning and Development Department prepared a report recommending approval of the application, because the proposal “represents a reasonable low intensity use of the undeveloped parcels surrounding the City’s lift station, and would serve as transition between the soon to be developed commercial parking facilities to the east, and the Hopson Road neighborhood to the west and south. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 10:55 am
United Parcel Service (concerning alleged “preferential treatment” for pregnant employess), and the Supreme Court’s opinion may address the Guidance. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 2:33 pm
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. [read post]
30 May 2014, 9:20 am
United Parcel Service, Inc., involves the interpretation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which provides that “women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions shall be treated the same for all employment-related purposes . . . as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work. [read post]
12 Jan 2014, 9:06 pm
United States, Steven L. [read post]
16 Jul 2013, 8:55 am
The facts arise out of the Washington Community Service Center, a neighborhood center in the Western Addition in San Francisco. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 10:03 am
Supreme Court in Decker v. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 4:16 pm
Hart In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 8:50 am
There is a plethora of case law to support this position, including Agassi West Condominium Assn. v. [read post]
23 Dec 2011, 1:19 pm
Review Granted United Parcel Service Wage and Hour Cases, S197722—Review Granted and Held—December 21, 2011 The court ordered briefing deferred pending the decision in Kirby v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 4:09 pm
However, associated equipment: Excludes substations; Must be on the same parcel as the building, except that equipment necessary to connect the system to an electrical grid may be located immediately adjacent to the parcel or separated only by an improved right of way; Must not occupy more than 500 square feet of ground surface; and Must not be located on a site that contains plants protected by the Native Plant Protection Act. [read post]
