Search for: "Allen v. Chanel, Inc.,"
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jun 2013, 4:33 am
Chanel, Inc. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 2:38 am
Subsequently, on or about September 6, 2012, defendant filed a discrimination lawsuit on plaintiff’s behalf in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Allen v Chanel, Inc., et al., 12-cv-6758 (LAP). [read post]
8 Jun 2022, 4:03 am
Defendant then directed Plaintiff to send the altered document back to Chanel, Inc. [read post]
30 Dec 2020, 11:32 am
Chanel, Inc., by Judge Loretta A. [read post]
11 Jun 2013, 6:52 am
By changing the word “including” to “excluding” with regard to a list of claims covered by a separation and release agreement before signing and returning the agreement to her employer, an employee showed “an intent to preserve her right to file a discrimination claim,” a federal district court in New York found, denying the employer’s motion to dismiss (Allen v Chanel, Inc, June 4, 2013, Patterson, R, Jr). [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 9:00 am
Photo Credit: Preston Smalley of Flickr By Bryan Russell In Coach, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Oct 2007, 6:36 am
For those who prefer briefs to boxers, a periodic collection of fashionable events in the judicial system: Venus v. [read post]
20 Nov 2007, 8:55 am
Clothing Collection, Inc. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 9:45 pm
For example, in Kraft Foods Holdings, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 5:43 am
” Refusing to dismiss the employee’s subsequent discrimination suit, the court found that her minor edit “manifested an intent to preserve her right to file a discrimination claim” (Allen v Chanel, Inc, SDNY June 4, 2013). [read post]
11 Oct 2006, 7:34 am
See Knitwaves Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 4:21 pm
Allen v Chanel Inc, Case 1:12-cv-06758-LAP. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 5:24 am
(Business IP and Intangible Asset Report and Blog) Global - Patents New exchange, Intellectual Property Exchange International, can be a game-changer, but will need good patents to thrive (IAM) (Technology Transfer Tactics) Australia Bittersweet decision for Mars but Cadbury settles purple dispute: Mars Australia Pty Ltd v Sweet Rewards Pty Ltd (Managing IP) (ipwars) Belgium Belgian Supreme Court prohibits fishing expeditions: Ineos Manufacturing Belgium NV and Ineos… [read post]
