Search for: "UNited States v. White" Results 881 - 900 of 7,191
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Jul 2021, 6:08 am by Smith Eibeler LLC
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held on July 29, 2021, that a white employee’s lawsuit against his former employer for workplace retaliation under Title VII could move forward. [read post]
23 Sep 2024, 10:32 am by Eugene Volokh
§ 1981, all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have "the same right … to make and enforce contracts … as is enjoyed by white citizens. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 6:00 am by Kevin Kaufman
A growing global problem is the so-called illicit whites or cheap whites. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 7:28 am by Richard Samp - Guest
United States by Richard Samp, Chief Counsel of the Washington Legal Foundation. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 3:06 am
During this upcoming Session, the New York Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments in White Plains Coat & Apron Co., Inc. v. [read post]
26 Mar 2011, 6:59 pm by Rebecca Coll
Northern District of California Judge Jeffrey White certified a nationwide class in a consumer product case this week in Wolph v. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 4:41 am
  In ALLEN WOLFSON, -v- AVRAHAM MOSKOWITZ,  08 Civ. 8796 (DLC);UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK'; 2009 U.S. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
10 May 2024, 9:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Although this Court's review is limited to reviewing facts contained in the record (see Matter of Jorling v Adirondack Park Agency, 214 AD3d 98, 101-102 [3d Dept 2023]), we find that respondents' footnote was a permissible statement and argument encompassing the applicable statutory and regulatory authorities governing the handling of an incomplete permit application (see Reed v New York State Elec. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 11:43 am by John Elwood
United States, 12-6355, concerning the proper application of the categorical analysis in Shepard v. [read post]