Search for: "Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Matter of" Results 41 - 60 of 468
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Nov 2020, 9:06 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Over the past decade, the plaintiffs’ class action bar has been both innovator and activist in finding its way around defense-centric legal precedents – such as the more rigorous class action standards established in Wal-Mart-Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 9:12 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 240 F.3d255, 259 (4th Cir. 2001); Price v. [read post]
” Employers May Restrict Union Buttons at Work In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 368 NLRB No. 146 (Dec. 16, 2019), the NLRB addressed whether a dress code policy that limits, but does not prohibit, the wearing of buttons and insignia violated the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). [read post]
19 Jan 2020, 9:01 pm by News Desk
Furthermore, a retail product sample of watermelon spears (sample # 1108315) collected at Wal-Mart on May 9, 2019, by FDA tested positive for L. monocytogenes. [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 7:10 am by Aditi Shah
First, because the Ninth Circuit already recognized that some class members in this case may not have a constitutional right to bond hearings, the class may no longer satisfy the Supreme Court’s standard articulated in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:18 am by Carolina Attorneys
Specifically, the citation stated: The officer named below has probable cause to believe that on or about Saturday, the 06 day of September, 2014, at 03:08 PM in the county named above you did unlawfully and willfully STEAL, TAKE, AND CARRY AWAY (ACNE TONER AND TOWELETTES), THE PERSONAL PROPERTY OF (WAL-MART STORES INC. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 7:18 am by MBettman
Wal-Mart Stores E., L.P., 2014-Ohio-2998 (2nd Dist (In case involving motorized carts at Wal-Mart, appeals court held that lack of customer training on use of carts insufficient to establish lack of training caused plaintiff’s injury.) [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 2:04 pm
See In re Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 129 USPQ2d 1148, 1152 (TTAB 2019) (INVESTING IN AMERICAN JOBS found to be a merely information phrase).Examining Attorney April Reeves asserted that consumers are accustomed to "I [heart] PGH"  and "PGH ART" being used in everyday speech, and therefore they would perceive the phrase not as a trademark but as an informational message expressing support for the Pittsburgh art scene. [read post]
14 Jun 2019, 10:01 am by Greg Mersol
These issues will likely become even worse as the case progresses, as the court, will ultimately need to sort out countless allegations regarding hiring, training, transfer, promotion, and discharge on an individual basis, a process the Supreme Court rejected in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]