Search for: "SUPERIOR PERFORMERS, INC." Results 1281 - 1300 of 1,607
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jul 2010, 3:58 am
An attorney’s superior performance can result in enhanced attorney’s fees but only in extraordinary circumstances, held the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision; the Court affirmed its position that attorney’s fees based on a lodestar calculation, under federal fee-shifting statutes, can be enhanced in certain situations. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 7:00 am by Yosie Saint-Cyr
In December 2008, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded Marta Piresferreira, a former employee of Bell Mobility Inc., more than $500,000 in damages arising from an assault at the hands of her supervisor. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 11:57 am by AALRR
Fillner Construction, Inc., issued June 28, 2010, because the independent contractor assumes responsibility for workplace safety by entering into a contract requiring the performance of inherently dangerous work. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 4:18 am
Librarian of Congress (Internet Cases) (Copyright Litigation Blog)   US Copyright – Lawsuits and strategic steps EMI - More freshly squeezed lime: EMI April Music Inc. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 5:59 pm by Duncan
Librarian of Congress (Internet Cases) (Copyright Litigation Blog) US Copyright – Lawsuits and strategic steps EMI – More freshly squeezed lime: EMI April Music Inc. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 4:18 pm by Rebecca Shafer, J.D.
Examine the TPA's internal quality control; ask – do they give “grades” and bonuses to adjusters for superior performance. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am by Steven M. Taber
– EPA News Release, June 2, 2010 A Connecticut landlord has agreed to pay a penalty of $2,140 and perform a lead abatement project valued at $20,360 for allegedly violating federal lead-based paint disclosure requirements. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am by smtaber
– EPA News Release, June 2, 2010 A Connecticut landlord has agreed to pay a penalty of $2,140 and perform a lead abatement project valued at $20,360 for allegedly violating federal lead-based paint disclosure requirements. [read post]
1 Jun 2010, 1:17 pm by Laura L. Himelstein, Esq.
In that case, the plaintiffs allege that their superiors told them that if they had to work extra hours to meet the company’s performance goals, they should do so but would not receive additional compensation. [read post]