Search for: "Notice of Supplemental Authority" Results 801 - 820 of 2,244
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jun 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Circuit issues major decision holding health benefits for future retirees is a mandatory subjectDeferring imposing a disciplinary penalty equivalent to disciplinary probationDenial of a “materially more advantageous” position may constitute an adverse employment action for the purposes of Title VIIDesignation of a disciplinary hearing officerDisciplinary action claimed filed with maliceDisciplinary dismissal not discriminationDisciplinary penalty of termination vacated as “shocking… [read post]
1 Jun 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Circuit issues major decision holding health benefits for future retirees is a mandatory subjectDeferring imposing a disciplinary penalty equivalent to disciplinary probationDenial of a “materially more advantageous” position may constitute an adverse employment action for the purposes of Title VIIDesignation of a disciplinary hearing officerDisciplinary action claimed filed with maliceDisciplinary dismissal not discriminationDisciplinary penalty of termination vacated as “shocking… [read post]
28 May 2019, 7:36 am by Chris Attig
Because Congress intended the Secretary to give veterans notice of its decisions, the Court reasoned, it could not be required to disclose the evidence to the veteran before the decision. [read post]
28 May 2019, 7:36 am by Chris Attig
Because Congress intended the Secretary to give veterans notice of its decisions, the Court reasoned, it could not be required to disclose the evidence to the veteran before the decision. [read post]
28 May 2019, 4:23 am by Public Employment Law Press
Circuit issues major decision holding health benefits for future retirees is a mandatory subjectDeferring imposing a disciplinary penalty equivalent to disciplinary probationDenial of a “materially more advantageous” position may constitute an adverse employment action for the purposes of Title VIIDesignation of a disciplinary hearing officerDisciplinary action claimed filed with maliceDisciplinary dismissal not discriminationDisciplinary penalty of termination vacated as “shocking… [read post]
28 May 2019, 4:23 am by Public Employment Law Press
Circuit issues major decision holding health benefits for future retirees is a mandatory subjectDeferring imposing a disciplinary penalty equivalent to disciplinary probationDenial of a “materially more advantageous” position may constitute an adverse employment action for the purposes of Title VIIDesignation of a disciplinary hearing officerDisciplinary action claimed filed with maliceDisciplinary dismissal not discriminationDisciplinary penalty of termination vacated as “shocking… [read post]
17 May 2019, 9:14 am by Eric Goldman
The visitors to Plaintiffs’ websites noticed and submitted complaints that the websites contained inaccurate and/or conflicting information. [read post]
14 May 2019, 8:27 am by MOTP
Generally, the remedy for a breach of a Rule 11 agreement is a breach-of-contract claim filed by a party. [read post]
13 May 2019, 6:05 am by Michael Geist
Then we had guidance from Jennifer Stoddart the privacy commissioner at the time in 2009 related to cross-border data transfers which essentially made that the policy of the the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and did bring to the fore a notion that in their view their consumers should be given notice of this fact and usually that would be done in their privacy policies. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 While this provision permits the submission of additional evidence, it cannot be used to add new claims against a respondent for which notice has not been provided (Appeal of Casey-Tomasi, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,301; Appeals of Gonzalez, 48 id. 405, Decision No. 15,898). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 While this provision permits the submission of additional evidence, it cannot be used to add new claims against a respondent for which notice has not been provided (Appeal of Casey-Tomasi, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,301; Appeals of Gonzalez, 48 id. 405, Decision No. 15,898). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 While this provision permits the submission of additional evidence, it cannot be used to add new claims against a respondent for which notice has not been provided (Appeal of Casey-Tomasi, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,301; Appeals of Gonzalez, 48 id. 405, Decision No. 15,898). [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 While this provision permits the submission of additional evidence, it cannot be used to add new claims against a respondent for which notice has not been provided (Appeal of Casey-Tomasi, 57 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 17,301; Appeals of Gonzalez, 48 id. 405, Decision No. 15,898). [read post]
6 May 2019, 7:52 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  You use names in your presentation for authority—doesn’t that indicate something about the value of names? [read post]
4 May 2019, 12:39 pm by MOTP
We noted that that the appellant "provide[d] no authority for her assertion that the Trust was required to support its claim with calculations supporting each month's interest computation over the life of the loan. [read post]
30 Apr 2019, 10:23 am by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Health plans must deliver electronic protected health information (“ePHI”) to electronic applications or software (“apps”) used by plan members, and are responsible under the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) Privacy and Security Rules for the security of electronic protected health information (“ePHI”) on apps they sponsor or provide, according to new guidance from the Department of Health & Human Services… [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 7:25 am by Rebecca Shafer, J.D.
Most employers are required to post notices advising employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 10:29 am by Camilla Hrdy
 Here is what the authors say about this:In 2009, the PTO refused to register the mark FUK! [read post]