Search for: "Test Plaintiff" Results 7561 - 7580 of 21,971
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jul 2017, 1:50 pm by Neumann Law Group
Afterwards, he allegedly had to undergo a battery of tests and take powerful medication to ensure he didn’t contract HIV or other diseases. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 12:43 pm by Resnick Law Group, P.C.
To prove retaliation, a plaintiff must meet a three-part test:  (1) The plaintiff invoked a right to leave under the FMLA, and (2) the employer made an adverse decision that (3) “was causally related to her invocation of rights. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 9:56 am by Steven Cohen
Williams testified that he performed numerous tests on Lee to ascertain where he was experiencing pain. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 8:00 am by Greg Mersol
In Sandusky Wellness, the plaintiff sought to bring a claim under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and specifically the Junk Fax Protection Act Amendments of 2005 due to the plaintiff’s receipt of an unsolicited facsimile transmission. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 6:54 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
Plaintiff appealed, arguing that the trial was fatally tainted because the judge charged the jury under the "but for" test and not the "motivating factor" test. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 7:17 am by Hirsch & Lyon
Actions that seem more conscious or intentional are more likely to meet the test for punitive damages — like driving a car when you know the brakes are defective or repeatedly driving when severely intoxicated. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 6:47 am by Joseph A. McNelis III
Several of the plaintiff’s claims—including disability discrimination and wrongful termination—were dismissed and the plaintiff appealed. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 5:13 am by Peter L. Altieri
Four senior sales executives of plaintiff Document Technologies Inc (“DTI”) collectively decided to leave DTI and signed new employment agreements with LDiscovery. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 5:13 am by Peter L. Altieri
Four senior sales executives of plaintiff Document Technologies Inc (“DTI”) collectively decided to leave DTI and signed new employment agreements with LDiscovery. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 5:13 am by Peter L. Altieri
Four senior sales executives of plaintiff Document Technologies Inc (“DTI”) collectively decided to leave DTI and signed new employment agreements with LDiscovery. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 3:32 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Further to the July 17 IPBiz post on "who" sang the number one hit "He's a Rebel" (the Blossoms, not the Crystals),IPBiz notes another interesting bit of music intellectual property. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 12:52 pm by Adam M. Hamel
The Plaintiff, Christina Barbuto, accepted a job with Advantage Sales and Marketing (ASM) promoting products inside supermarkets. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 12:52 pm by Adam M. Hamel
The Plaintiff, Christina Barbuto, accepted a job with Advantage Sales and Marketing (ASM) promoting products inside supermarkets. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 12:05 pm by jameswilson29@gmail.com
Under this part of the test, a court will look to determine whether the function of the obligation was to provide some sort of daily necessity such as food or transportation. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 10:35 am by Rebecca Tushnet
“The best reading of California precedent is that the reasonable consumer test is a requirement under the UCL’s unlawful prong only when it is an element of the predicate violation. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 7:36 am by Steven Cohen
 The plaintiff hired a mechanical engineering expert witness to assist in a providing causation testimony. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 5:27 am by Joseph A. McNelis III
After the plaintiff disclosed as part of the application process that she was a medical marijuana user and would not pass the required pre-employment drug test, the company did not hire her and she filed suit. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 9:57 am by Lebowitz & Mzhen
The court noted that prior case-law laid out a multi-factor test to determine whether a plaintiff was considered to be “occupying” a vehicle. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 8:17 am by Neumann Law Group
The claim, the court found, fell squarely within the two-pronged test for determining whether a plaintiff’s claim is foreclosed by the discretionary function exemption. [read post]