Search for: "Brinker v. Brinker"
Results 61 - 80
of 622
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Oct 2015, 4:00 am
(See, e.g., Brinker, supra,53 Cal.4th at p. [read post]
24 Sep 2015, 4:00 am
In a third recent opinion, Alcantar v. [read post]
24 Jul 2015, 5:00 am
In Safeway, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 3:38 am
In its unpublished opinion, the appeals court noted that California employers are not required to police their employees’ meal breaks (Green v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 4:00 am
” Diaz v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 12:09 pm
Perhaps the most litigated word in recent years was “provide”—until the California Supreme Court issued, in Brinker v. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 8:00 am
" The Court rejected arguments that Brinker v. [read post]
22 Feb 2015, 6:36 pm
Corp. v. [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 11:01 am
The lower court found substantial evidence that the employees were routinely and consistently prohibited from taking meal periods and rest breaks in violation in violation of California law and the standard set forth by the California Supreme Court in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
In Gerard v. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 9:35 am
In 2012, the California Supreme Court issued its highly-anticipated opinion in Brinker Restaurant Corporation, et al. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 8:06 am
” The Court also rejected the employees’ assertion that, in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
12 Feb 2015, 8:06 am
” The Court also rejected the employees’ assertion that, in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
3 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
In Lee v. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 4:00 am
Augustus v. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 4:00 am
Martinez v. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 1:27 pm
In Augustus v. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 8:00 am
The trial court thus predicted the eventual holding in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
24 Nov 2014, 8:00 am
In Martinez v. [read post]
14 Nov 2014, 10:27 am
The opinion explains the meaning of Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
