Search for: "DOE-INDIVIDUALS" Results 41 - 60 of 114,347
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2018, 1:58 pm by Kevin Kaufman
(b) Brackets apply to individuals earning more than $75,000. [read post]
18 Jul 2018, 8:25 pm by Howard Bashman
Eleventh Circuit denies rehearing en banc of decision holding that Title VII does not protect gay and lesbian individuals from discrimination: You can access today’s order of the U.S. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 3:00 am by Louis M. Solomon
In our recent posting we discussed the fact that a declaratory judgment action does not confer independent federal jurisdiction on an international controversy. [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 6:02 am by James O. Birr, III, Esq.
Electronic Evidence, eDiscovery Case Law and the Attorney’s Role – Part I 5 Things You Need To Know About Obtaining Discovery From Mobile Electronic Devices The post Spoliation Of Evidence: When Does An Individual Or Business Have An Obligation To Preserve Evidence? [read post]
31 Jul 2019, 6:02 am by James O. Birr, III, Esq.
Electronic Evidence, eDiscovery Case Law and the Attorney’s Role – Part I 5 Things You Need To Know About Obtaining Discovery From Mobile Electronic Devices The post Spoliation Of Evidence: When Does An Individual Or Business Have An Obligation To Preserve Evidence? [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 1:00 pm by Steven G. Pearl
The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, holding as follows: Under Ninth Circuit precedent, "an unaccepted Rule 68 offer that would fully satisfy a plaintiff’s claim is insufficient to render the [individual] claim moot," and such an offer, even if made before the plaintiff moves for class certification, does not render the class claims moot. [read post]
4 Aug 2013, 4:31 am by Brian Leiter
The insult "loser" does seem to characterize these individuals. [read post]
19 Oct 2013, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
Terrible Herbst, Inc., 653 F.3d 1081, 1091–92 (9th Cir. 2011), we held “that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of judgment – for the full amount of the named plaintiff’s individual claim and made before the named plaintiff files a motion for class certification – does not moot a class action” (emphasis added), but we did not squarely address whether the offer mooted the plaintiff’s individual claim. [read post]
4 Mar 2008, 8:02 am
Bavan (HUD) has posted Does Housing Discrimination Exist Based on the 'Color' of an Individual's Voice? [read post]
19 Apr 2023, 5:41 pm by Michael B. Cohen, P.A.
Under federal law, being present at the scene of a crime does not necessarily make an individual guilty. [read post]
19 Sep 2007, 2:56 pm
I received the following question from a potential client who lives in the Atlanta, Georgia metro area: I’m considering filing a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. [read post]
14 Sep 2015, 6:27 am by Andrew Williamson
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that an unaccepted offer of judgment does not moot a lead plaintiff’s claim in a putative class action. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 3:50 pm by Paul Levy
”  If “government entity” included individuals, this last clause would not be needed So the individual blogger is plainly off the hook as a “commercial entity. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 11:42 am
Instead, it uses the fictitious names "Does 1 through 50," stating that the plaintiff does not know the individuals' "true names and capacities," id., but will amend her complaint with the court's leave in the future. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:03 pm by Ann C. Schneider
Unfortunately, the Alert does not provide any further description of this individual.This individual is not associated with the Board. [read post]
28 Aug 2012, 2:14 pm by Scott Lewis
In some cases, the individual does not meet the listing exactly, but does have similar disabilities severe enough to equal a listing. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 7:30 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The Doctrine of Estoppel cannot be invoked to attain eligibility for a retirement benefit if the individual does not qualify for the benefit claimed2015 NY Slip Op 01222, Appellate Division, Third DepartmentA member [Retiree] of the New York State Employees Retirement System accepted an incentive for early retirement in 2010, with an effective date of retirement of May 31, 2010. [read post]