Search for: "Express Services Inc" Results 4061 - 4080 of 6,155
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Aug 2012, 4:43 am by Heidi Henson
Adopting a standard similar to that expressed by the Sixth Circuit in Staunch v Cont’l Airlines Inc, the court stated that in cases where a plaintiff avers that a relevant compensation agreement, like the CBA, does not accurately reflect all the hours the employee actually worked, the employer has the burden of showing that the employee has not worked the requisite hours. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 6:19 am by Hunton & Williams LLP
The class action concerning Jiffy Lube alleged that in April 2011, Heartland Automotive Services, Inc. [read post]
8 Aug 2012, 3:00 am by Terry Hart
”8 The idea/expression distinction is derived from this same reasoning. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 10:26 am by Ryan McCabe
The POA asserted causes of action of negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of warranty of workmanlike services, and breach of fiduciary duty. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 10:22 am by Ryan McCabe
The POA asserted causes of action of negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of warranty of workmanlike services, and breach of fiduciary duty. [read post]
5 Aug 2012, 2:35 pm by Mark Zamora
Conway Express, Inc., 261 Ga. 41 (1991); Georgia Power Co. v. [read post]
3 Aug 2012, 10:32 am by admin
For more information about the Investment Canada Act see: Investment Canada SOEs National Security ____________________ For more information about our regulatory law services: Contact For more regulatory law updates follow us on Twitter: @CanadaAttorney [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 7:08 am by Gmlevine
” “Intent to use” suggests that applicant’s services were not at that point “in commerce. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 10:37 pm by Priya Murthy
Cecil Corbin-Mark, Policy Director for West Harlem Environmental Action, Inc. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 12:54 pm by Roy Ginsburg
Section 6 clearly does not provide an antitrust exemption for a “buyer cartel” for labor services. [read post]
26 Jul 2012, 6:24 am by Steven Koprince
The GAO held that although it was improper for the Forest Service to evaluate Crewzers’ pricing on a materially different basis than expressed in the BPAs, the Forest Service’s corrective action was an appropriate means of addressing the matter, and was within the Forest Service’s discretion.   [read post]