Search for: "Washington v. State Of Illinois et al" Results 41 - 60 of 185
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Apr 2019, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
Following Recent Cases in Media Law at the European Court of Human Rights, van der Hof et al. [read post]
4 Jan 2019, 3:20 pm by Robert Kreisman
Capital Fitness, Inc. d/b/a XSport Fitness, et al., No. 2-17-1035 (Appellate Court of Illinois, Second Judicial District). [read post]
21 Nov 2018, 6:58 am by Inside Privacy
Six Flags Entertainment Corporation et al., a case arising under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, 740 ILCS 14/1 et seq. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am by Wolfgang Demino
Keller on behalf of STATE OF TEXAS (Keller, Scott) (Entered: 11/28/2017)11/28/201711 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae by STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ARKANSAS, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Brief of Texas et al., # 2 Text of… [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 11:19 am by Wolfgang Demino
Keller on behalf of STATE OF TEXAS (Keller, Scott) (Entered: 11/28/2017)11/28/201711 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Curiae by STATE OF TEXAS, STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ARKANSAS, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Brief of Texas et al., # 2 Text of… [read post]
27 Oct 2017, 10:00 am by Chris Mirasola
During two days of nonclassified argumentation, the defendants in U.S. v Khalid Sheikh Mohammed et al. argued that the government has delayed, denied, and/or destroyed discovery documents. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:32 pm by Wolfgang Demino
  SHARON EUL et al., on behalf of themselves and a class, Plaintiffs,v.TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS et al., Defendants.No. 15 C 7755.United States District Court, N.D. [read post]
” Following is an excerpt: A New York federal court recently declined to certify under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 23”) six classes of salaried “apprentices” at Chipotle restaurants asserting claims for overtime pay under New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) and parallel state laws in Missouri, Colorado, Washington, Illinois, and North Carolina, on the theory that they were misclassified as exempt executives in… [read post]
” Following is an excerpt: A New York federal court recently declined to certify under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 23”) six classes of salaried “apprentices” at Chipotle restaurants asserting claims for overtime pay under New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) and parallel state laws in Missouri, Colorado, Washington, Illinois, and North Carolina, on the theory that they were misclassified as exempt executives in… [read post]
6 Apr 2017, 5:03 am by Adriana S. Kosovych
A New York federal court recently declined to certify under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 23”) six classes of salaried “apprentices” at Chipotle restaurants asserting claims for overtime pay under New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) and parallel state laws in Missouri, Colorado, Washington, Illinois, and North Carolina, on the theory that they were misclassified as exempt executives in Scott et al.… [read post]