Search for: "Macy v. Macy"
Results 101 - 120
of 226
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2012, 5:05 am
United States v. [read post]
29 Apr 2012, 7:59 pm
Macy v. [read post]
9 May 2012, 4:37 am
The opinion also explains that Macy’s computer records showed that nine boys' Polo shirts and three men's Polo shirts were marked down by [Wells]. [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 3:30 am
Other notable items for Acting Chair Lipnic include: She was part of the EEOC’s unanimous 2012 decision in Macy v. [read post]
26 Jan 2017, 3:30 am
Other notable items for Acting Chair Lipnic include: She was part of the EEOC’s unanimous 2012 decision in Macy v. [read post]
4 Aug 2017, 8:44 am
See, e.g., Macy v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 7:10 pm
--Dorward v Macy’s Inc, MDFla, July 20, 2011: An employer’s alleged breach of an employment contract containing an arbitration agreement did not foreclose enforcing arbitration against an employee, ruled a federal district court in Florida, in spite of her laundry list of reasons for why she should not be compelled to arbitrate her Title VII claims. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 3:27 pm
Macy's. [read post]
31 Jan 2025, 10:51 am
People are still mad about Macy’s buying Marshall Field’s and changing the name to Macy’s in 2006—protests continued to 2012 and beyond. [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 1:32 pm
Corp., 354 F.3d 1020, 1035 (9th Cir.2004) (Berzon, J., concurring): If I went to Macy’s website and did a search for a Calvin Klein shirt, would Macy’s violate Calvin Klein’s trademark if it responded (as does Amazon.com, for example) with the requested shirt and pictures of other shirts I might like to consider as well? [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 1:55 pm
Macy's. [read post]
14 May 2010, 8:31 am
" Peters v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 10:02 am
(For some reason I thought they both ran the same year, which would have been awesome, instead they both ran against-- and in some way contributed to the victory of John V. [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 6:00 pm
Judge Lasnik presumably will enter it in short order.The case is Topline Corp. v. [read post]
10 Aug 2012, 3:47 am
The video, which features an EEOC brown bag session on the impact of the commission’s Macy v Holder decision, makes clear the agency’s view that Title VII’s prohibition against discrimination based on “sex” extends to claims for sex stereotyping, as well any other claim asserting that gender was taken into account — including discrimination due to an individual’s transition from one gender to another. [read post]
30 Jun 2009, 5:36 pm
In Owen v. [read post]
7 Jan 2013, 2:24 pm
Just as in People v. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 9:23 am
Macy v. [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 9:23 am
Macy v. [read post]
23 Jul 2010, 8:52 am
Macy's, Inc., 175 Cal. [read post]
