Search for: "State v. German" Results 101 - 120 of 3,001
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jun 2018, 1:06 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Employees of a state or a political subdivision of a state may not be required to pay an agency-shop fee to a union unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay such a feeJanus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 85 U. [read post]
30 Jun 2024, 7:51 am by Joel R. Brandes
 Baz v Patterson, 2024 WL 1879035 (Seventh Circuit, 2024) [Germany][Petition granted] [Habitual residence]   In Baz v Patterson, 2024 WL 1879035 (Seventh Circuit, 2024) Asli Baz, a citizen of Germany, filed suit seeking to compel Anthony Patterson, a citizen of the United States, to return their six-year-old son, A.P., from Illinois to Germany. [read post]
31 May 2013, 4:59 am by Florian Mueller
After Microsoft felt forced for procedural reasons to add Google Inc. to a German patent infringement action originally brought only against its Motorola Mobility subsidiary, a Microsoft v. [read post]
In the first fine issued by a German data protection authority under the European General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), on 21 November 2018 the authority of the German state of Baden-Württemberg (“LfDI”) imposed a fine of Euro 20,000 on a social media provider for a violation of its data security obligations under Art. 32 of the GDPR. [read post]
10 Jul 2007, 12:23 pm
I was reminded of another big difference between Americans and Germans (Europeans?) [read post]
Trial evidence supported the district court’s judgment, blocking registration of VAGISAN in the United States. [read post]
19 Feb 2018, 4:18 pm by INFORRM
Most European jurisdictions, including the German Basic Law recognise that there are limits. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 10:00 pm by Nietzer
On Septemeber 15, 2011, an Indiana United States District Court found that a reasonable jury could find that employee, a 63-year old employee at Knauf GmbH (“Knauf”), a German company, was terminated because of his age and his claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 10:00 pm by Nietzer
On Septemeber 15, 2011, an Indiana United States District Court found that a reasonable jury could find that employee, a 63-year old employee at Knauf GmbH (“Knauf”), a German company, was terminated because of his age and his claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). [read post]