Search for: "Supervisors v. United States"
Results 621 - 640
of 1,689
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 May 2018, 10:03 pm
See United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 3:33 pm
” (In an earlier opinion, the Seventh Circuit in United States v. [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 8:19 pm
In Yvonne Morales f/k/a Javier Morales v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 1:24 pm
Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., et al., Supreme Court of the United States, 563 U. [read post]
14 Jul 2006, 11:41 am
The United States Supreme Court has twice rejected prior Board rulings for minimizing the importance of independent judgment in the assignment or direction of employees by nursing personnel. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 6:00 am
Further, "Due process requires that the * * * hearing be open to the press and public" [See Fitzgerald v. [read post]
9 Jan 2024, 6:00 am
Further, "Due process requires that the * * * hearing be open to the press and public" [See Fitzgerald v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 11:30 am
As a general rule, supervisors are excluded from the voting unit. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 11:30 am
As a general rule, supervisors are excluded from the voting unit. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 7:16 am
In Enterprise Leasing, the Fourth Circuit held that President Obama’s recess appointment of a board member to the NLRB is constitutionally valid under the Recess Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution only if the appointment is made during an intersession, as opposed to an intrasession, recess of the Senate. [read post]
17 Nov 2022, 2:15 pm
United Parcel Serv., Inc., 214 N.J. 518 (2013), our State Supreme Court concluded that evidence of indirect influence could support a CEPA claim. [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 8:51 am
United States, 69 Fed. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 3:32 pm
” Breyer added: “Explain it to me how your test does not make this statute potentially criminalizing 100 million workers in the United States. [read post]
7 May 2012, 12:22 pm
All I know is that Samper v. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 9:26 am
A supervisor approved the officer’s decision, and an immigration judge later affirmed it without offering further explanation. [read post]
1 Oct 2015, 9:30 am
That 1872 ruling, in the case of United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2016, 1:09 pm
In United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2014, 4:55 pm
The appeals court pointed out that the DOL’s case would depend on the information received from 150 other state employees who had consented to the disclosure of their identities, and that the state employer already had this information in its possession (Perez v United States District Court, Tacoma, April 18, 2014, Trott, S). [read post]
18 Aug 2017, 7:00 am
The United States couldn’t send him back. [read post]
