Search for: "AT&T Operations Inc" Results 4761 - 4780 of 10,922
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Dec 2015, 5:30 am
  The defendant was a pharmaceutical company, not an HMO operator. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 4:09 am by Rebecca Tushnet
United We Stand, America New York, Inc., 128 F.3d 86, 92–93 (2d Cir. 1997) (Lanham Act isn’t limited to “profitmaking activity”). [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 3:33 am by Peter Mahler
Here’s what the court said in that regard: [T]he reference to a “for cause” termination in a forced sale provision of the [Stockholders Agreement] is quite different from an employment agreement. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 12:25 pm by John Elwood
” Next up is CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Dec 2015, 3:43 am
  The class plaintiffs weren’t typical and their claims weren’t common because they weren’t even members of three of the four subclasses (which contained non-overlapping definitions). [read post]
2 Dec 2015, 12:38 pm by Schachtman
Marshall, 630 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1980), the Circuit reviewed an OSHA regulation promulgated to protect cotton gin operators from the dangers of byssinosis. [read post]
2 Dec 2015, 11:04 am
  Senator Grassley also cited the then-Attorney General Eric Holder's statement that:"There are only two categories of companies affected by trade-secret theft: those that know they've been compromised and those that don't know yet. [read post]
The Haunted Hotel, Inc., the plaintiff was a visitor to one of the defendant’s several haunted attractions operated in the San Diego area. [read post]
1 Dec 2015, 7:22 am by Joy Waltemath
Consequently, the court refused to allow the employer to file yet another amended complaint, instead dismissing the operative complaint with prejudice (Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Nov 2015, 6:55 am by Andrew Delaney
In re Petition of VTel Wireless Inc., 2015 VT 135By Andrew DelaneyWhat do you do when someone else’s plans are going to mess with your plans? [read post]
For now, we only need the basic name (e.g, “Nike,” not “Nike, Inc. [read post]