Search for: "Long v. Superior Court" Results 661 - 680 of 3,870
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Aug 2010, 3:15 pm by Mike Aylward
On appeal, however, the Superior Court ruled that Royal had no such right. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 11:30 am by John Schudlo
Just last year, in Horner v 897469 Ontario Inc. [1], the Ontario Superior Court awarded $20,000 in aggravated damages to an employee who was dismissed at Christmas time. [read post]
7 May 2008, 12:02 am
Superior Court (1939) 33 Cal.App.2d 48, 52-53; see also Stevens v. [read post]
16 Mar 2017, 2:42 pm by Richard J. Simmons
The ability of hospitals to use meal period waivers was called into question by a 2015 Court of Appeal decision in Gerard v. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 12:28 pm by Abbott & Kindermann
(B245131; 224 Cal.App.4th 1105; Los Angeles County Superior Court; BS131347.) [read post]
28 Nov 2010, 1:12 pm by Daniel E. Cummins
The first time around, the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that attorney-expert communications were discoverable--that decision has been withdrawn as the full Superior Court prepares to address the issue again at a date still to be determined. [read post]
30 Jun 2021, 1:16 pm by Salma Gilani
Furthermore, the OLRB factually distinguished an earlier 2014 decision of the Ontario Superior Court in Paquette v. [read post]
25 Apr 2014, 5:02 am
 The Court of Appeals found that the Superior Court Judgeconcluded that the initial search warra [read post]
12 Sep 2010, 9:22 pm by Norm Pattis
Snipers will prowl the roof of the New Haven Superior Court this morning just as they have on other occasions when Steven Hayes appeared there. [read post]
20 Apr 2012, 3:25 pm by The Complex Litigator
Superior Court (Hohnbaum) (April 12, 2012), the California Supreme Court began its opinion by observing, “For the better part of a century, California law has guaranteed to employees wage and hour protection, including meal and rest periods intended to ameliorate the consequences of long hours. [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 4:06 am by Andy Zahn - Guest
Superior Court (1987), in this case because of the remoteness of the subsidiaries’ connections to North Carolina. [read post]