Search for: "Parcell v. United States" Results 521 - 540 of 925
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jul 2013, 7:54 am by Joy Waltemath
Because returning a long-absent employee who suffered from severe stress to a less stressful shift could be a reasonable accommodation, a federal district court in Florida refused to dismiss a supervisor’s ADA and state law claims despite UPS’ argument that attendance was an essential function and she was not “qualified” due to her absence (Markwart v United Parcel Service, July 24, 2013, Chappell, S). [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 9:01 pm by Joanna L. Grossman and Deborah L. Brake
At the time, she worked as an “air driver” for UPS, a delivery driver who carried lighter letters and packs for United Parcel Service that had arrived by air. [read post]
Most all agree that the United States Supreme Court will ultimately decide the question of the legitimacy of the Rule. [read post]
31 Aug 2021, 4:09 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
This would suggest the agencies are better off making case-by-case determinations as to whether a given parcel is part of the "waters of the United States," but that is a far more time and labor-intensive process than applying regulatory standards. [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 12:00 am by Sever | Storey
New London, the United States Supreme Court upheld the transfer of private property to a private developer as part of an economic development plan. [read post]
5 Dec 2018, 11:18 am by Leonard Gordon
The FTC alleges Pukke perpetuated the SBE scam with a piece of parcel he should have turned over to the FTC in a 2006 order in FTC v. [read post]
14 Apr 2009, 1:30 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCriminal Practice Panel Rejects Claim 300 Month Prison Term For Producing Child Pornography Too Severe United States v. [read post]
Bensaid v. the United Kingdom (Application no. 44599/98, Feb. 6, 2001). [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 7:13 am by Epstein Becker Green
United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12-1226, which poses whether the Pregnancy Discrimination Act requires an employer to accommodate a pregnant woman with work restrictions related to pregnancy in the same manner as it accommodates a non-pregnant employee with the same restrictions, but not related to pregnancy. [read post]