Search for: "Works v. State"
Results 4261 - 4280
of 60,395
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Mar 2011, 11:47 am
Category: Recent Decisions;Contract Law Opinions Body: SC18360 - State v. [read post]
5 Oct 2023, 12:00 am
In February, BSSD’s principal stated in a text message that the work was 90% done and demanded further payment toward the agreed price. [read post]
29 Jun 2021, 11:10 am
Supreme Court issued a ruling, Gross v. [read post]
21 May 2021, 2:47 am
In its judgment in Amaghlobeli and Others v. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 9:56 am
Jones v. [read post]
8 Aug 2017, 7:44 am
In the alternative, it stated that repudiatory breach was accepted by notice of termination via email on 7 July. [read post]
1 Oct 2012, 4:00 am
The case is Gomez Lawn Service Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 10:32 am
Section 230 has never worked this way; instead, Section 230 applies on an item-by-item basis. [read post]
7 Jun 2022, 8:13 am
Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 11:10 am
Attorney Preet Bharara has filed a 53-page complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, United States of America v Carl Kruger, Richard Lipsky, Aaron Malinski, Solomon Kalish, Robert Aquino, David Rosen, William Boyland, Jr. and Michael Turano, alleging violations of 18 USC §§1341, 1343, 1346, 1349, and 1956(a)(1)(B) and (h).In a press release issued March 10, 2011, concerning the complaint, Governor Cuomo said:"Today's… [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 4:50 am
If and when those facts are uncovered, (e.g., through data on hours/weeks/shifts worked, rates of pay, amounts of overtime worked, numbers of employees meeting the class description, frequency of pay periods, numbers of terminated employees in the class, etc.), the state court case should immediately be removed to federal court with the facts obtained by defendants that support removal. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 4:50 am
If and when those facts are uncovered, (e.g., through data on hours/weeks/shifts worked, rates of pay, amounts of overtime worked, numbers of employees meeting the class description, frequency of pay periods, numbers of terminated employees in the class, etc.), the state court case should immediately be removed to federal court with the facts obtained by defendants that support removal. [read post]
10 Aug 2008, 1:09 am
(Gosselin v. [read post]
18 Aug 2022, 9:49 am
Longarzo * DMCA’s Unhelpful 512(f) Preempts Helpful State Law Claims–Stevens v. [read post]
10 Feb 2011, 7:23 am
In Fryer v. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 3:30 am
That is, in a pleading filed yesterday in a federal appellate court, the United States of America revealed its position that our federal laws that protect against discrimination at work do not apply to gay employees. [read post]
8 Oct 2016, 11:08 am
Case citation: Rotblut v. [read post]
5 May 2018, 5:31 pm
Turman, et al. v. [read post]
3 Aug 2011, 3:33 am
Portal to portal payManners v State of New York, 285 A.D.2d 858, [Appeal dismissed, 97 N.Y.2d 637] Charles W. [read post]
16 Jul 2007, 6:53 am
In Grabowski v. [read post]
