Search for: "Works v. State"
Results 7421 - 7440
of 60,502
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Dec 2010, 1:52 pm
The Court reached this conclusion in Sheppard v. [read post]
23 Apr 2019, 5:00 am
April 11, 2019) (purported collective and class action alleging Lowe’s violated FLSA and state wage and hour laws by failing to pay hourly managers for all hours worked) Medina v. [read post]
16 Aug 2014, 9:10 am
Case citation: Denison v. [read post]
31 Jul 2017, 10:25 am
See, e.g., Coopers & Lybrand v. [read post]
15 Apr 2014, 10:04 am
However, in Tornatore v. [read post]
17 Aug 2009, 4:10 am
"In Martinez v Safir, App. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 2:31 pm
Writing for the Court, Justice Thomas explained that the holding of United States v. [read post]
28 Dec 2012, 8:34 am
MacDermid, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2010, 8:02 am
A recent decision rendered by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, Julio Paz Y Mino v. [read post]
2 May 2020, 4:47 pm
Centre for Democracy and the Rule of Law v. [read post]
3 Mar 2007, 4:19 pm
Shaw’s work plan. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 1:50 am
S 296 states that a “worker” is an individual who works, or normally works or seeks to work (a) under a contract of employment (an “employee”), or (b) under any other contract whereby they undertake to do or perform personally any work or services for another party to the contract who is not a professional client of theirs (a “limb (b) worker”). [read post]
26 May 2009, 3:22 am
--Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of TexasOpinion Date: 5/11/09Cite: Courtoom Sciences, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Oct 2019, 2:56 pm
However, the union claimed that decades of NLRB case law was unconstitutional and that its activity was protected as free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution pursuant to Reed v. [read post]
26 Sep 2024, 9:01 pm
Yet these obvious comparisons didn’t even occur to the judges.In Tully v. [read post]
17 Jun 2011, 10:05 am
Simon, 51 Ohio St. 233; State v. [read post]
18 Jul 2011, 3:39 am
Supreme Court Home Office v Tariq [2011] UKSC 35 (13 July 2011) Al Rawi & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2011] UKSC 34 (13 July 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Brighton and Hove City Council v PM & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 795 (12 July 2011) Pannone LLP v Aardvark Digital Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 803 (12 July 2011) Jones & Anor v Ruth & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 804 (12 July 2011) Shovelar & Ors v Lane & Ors… [read post]
18 Nov 2021, 4:17 pm
Following this new settlement, E, L, and certain H-4 spouses will be able to work just by having their valid visas, and they will not need to file any separate applications nor need an employment authorization card (work permit) to lawfully work in the United States. [read post]
1 Mar 2008, 12:14 am
Playboy Enterprises v. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 6:17 am
State, supra (quoting Deal v. [read post]
