Search for: "HARMS v. HARMS"
Results 1321 - 1340
of 36,743
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Aug 2010, 5:55 pm
Continuing a line of cases that generally allow for the recovery of medical benefits where a worker is exposed to blood and other body fluids, yet where there is no actual proof of harm, a Kentucky court recently awarded $700 in medical benefits to a health care worker who was splattered in the face and eye with blood and saline while flushing a patient's I.V. line [Kentucky Employers Safety Assoc., v. [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 8:15 am
Building off its decision in Spokeo v. [read post]
7 May 2024, 6:00 am
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“ACK RATs”),[1] No. 23-1501, and Melone v. [read post]
15 Jan 2020, 9:24 am
HIAS v. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 5:32 pm
Perez and Animal Science Products v. [read post]
27 Jan 2021, 3:11 pm
Ball v. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 9:28 am
There was no public harm. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 10:31 am
Esther Salas in FTC v Wyndham, et al: See Am. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 10:31 am
Esther Salas in FTC v Wyndham, et al: See Am. [read post]
4 Jul 2023, 10:33 pm
" In Williams v. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 1:51 pm
Hebble Stroud v. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 11:48 am
Corp. v. [read post]
A California Judge Allows a Baker to Discriminate Against a Lesbian Couple Who Wanted a Wedding Cake
7 Feb 2018, 7:00 am
” And in Roberts v. [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 4:00 am
Kingston v. [read post]
22 Jul 2021, 11:06 am
After reviewing the facts and holding in Ramirez, we discuss how the decision clarifies the concrete harm requirement established by SCOTUS’s Spokeo decision, Ramirez’s implications for class action and individual lawsuits alleging violations of federal consumer financial protection laws, and the potential impact on state court litigation. [read post]
1 May 2019, 4:00 am
Platnick v. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 12:11 pm
., Cohen v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 6:44 am
Koch v. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 5:24 pm
That’s what happened in Haggard v. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 1:20 pm
., v. [read post]
