Search for: "Transportation General, Inc." Results 1001 - 1020 of 2,671
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Sep 2016, 11:26 am by Paul D. Knothe
  The Court of Appeal additionally cited a previous Court of Appeal decision, Orange County Employees, Assoc., Inc. v. [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 9:51 am by Jeffrey D. Polsky
CLS Transportation, approved such waivers for class actions (but not for the seemingly analogous claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act). [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 6:46 am by Jennifer Parent
” Of primary concern to the court was that the $1 million allocated to California’s “Private Attorneys General Act” (PAGA) claim was modest. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 4:49 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
The Nature of Sequential InnovationChristopher Sprigman, Christopher Buccafusco & Stefan Bechtold How to pick between innovating or borrowing. [read post]
11 Aug 2016, 3:50 am by Michael Grossman
Both sustained injuries and had to be transported to a nearby hospital. [read post]
21 Jul 2016, 9:30 pm by Justin Daniel
Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that the U.S. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 2:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
A well-respected officer decided, on his own initiative, to be more aggressive with his traffic stops to get his numbers up (City of Chaska, Minnesota and Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc., Local No. 210, St. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 10:00 pm by Coral Beach
Five days after General Mills Inc. tripled the size of its flour recall — now at 30 million pounds — officials in China warned people there to stop using certain bags of Gold Medal flour because of possible E. coli contamination. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
 Disciplinary Procedures - In General - A female tenth grader took a pie to firefighters. [read post]
25 Jun 2016, 7:03 am by Rishabh Bhandari
Isaac Park analyzed the Supreme Court’s ruling in RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 9:30 pm by Justin Daniel
SW General Inc., a case that involves constraints on the President’s power to issue temporary appointments—specifically, the limits on the ability of an official to serve as both the acting officer and permanent nominee—and that comes to the Court from the U.S. [read post]