Search for: "New York v. Class" Results 81 - 100 of 6,628
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 May 2011, 5:00 am by Victoria VanBuren
The Wall Street Journal (April 27) Supreme Court Allows Contracts That Prohibit Class-Action Arbitration, The New York Times (April 27) Supreme Court Allows Companies to Opt Out of Class Actions, ADR Prof Blog (April 27) Continuing the Discussion of the AT&T v. [read post]
18 Feb 2015, 8:50 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
They claim defendants did not pay hourly employees an extra hour of pay when working a ten-hour day, as required under New York law. [read post]
28 Jan 2007, 4:43 am
In the Products Liability section of January’s issue of the New York Law Journal, Michael Hoenig reviews two interesting new opinions. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 10:15 am by Alan S. Kaplinsky
Midland Funding, LLC. have filed a joint motion with the New York federal district court seeking preliminary approval of a class settlement. [read post]
3 Jul 2019, 2:31 pm
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit handed a significant victory to New York’s home care industry.1  In Abdullayeva v. [read post]
16 May 2008, 2:31 pm
Plaintiff’s lawyer filed the class action in the Southern District of New York on the grounds of diversity jurisdiction. [read post]
7 Apr 2008, 6:00 am
" Other press coverage appears in the New York Times ("Appeals Court Panel Throws Out Class Action Over Light Cigarettes") and the New York Sun ("Judge Stamps Out a Cigarette Class Action"). [read post]
8 Apr 2010, 9:21 pm by Paul Karlsgodt
Ct., March 31, 2010) in which the Court held that a New York state rule prohibiting class actions to recover statutory penalties did not apply in a case filed in federal court exercising diversity jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 8:21 am
In an opinion piece in the New York Times, it's argued that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) gets second-class treatment. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 2:53 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  Since the decision was issued in June, cases have been filed in New York federal courts against Conde Nast, Warner Music, Gawker Media and others. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 5:09 am
Entity that Employed Significant Number of Putative Class Members was an Indispensable Party under Rule 19 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and could not be Joined in Class Action Without Destroying Federal Court Diversity Jurisdiction thus Necessitating Dismissal of Class Action Complaint New York Court Holds Plaintiff filed a putative class action against Clear Channel Communications and Clear Channel Broadcasting for violations of… [read post]