Search for: "Anderson v. Employment Division"
Results 1 - 20
of 105
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2024, 4:37 am
In Anderson v Blabey, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of a shareholder’s derivative action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and non-compliance with BCL 713 by effectuating a reverse stock split. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 7:47 am
In Anderson v Anderson, --- N.Y.S.3d ----, 2023 WL 8246131, 2023 N.Y. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 8:00 am
District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola Division, seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief.In a written statement, EEOC Birmingham District Director Bradley Anderson, noted that “Federal law requires employers to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs if reasonable accommodation can be made without causing undue burden to the business. [read post]
21 Jul 2023, 8:00 am
Sanderson Farms, LLC and Sanderson Farms, LLC (Processing Division), Case No. 5:21-cv-00084-KS-BWR) in U.S. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 5:01 am
And here is the second decision that was upheld, Magistrate Judge John Anderson's decision in Doe v. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 6:50 pm
Selikoff entered Anderson’s College of Medicine, in Glasgow, Scotland.[13] 1936-12-28. [read post]
6 Feb 2023, 12:20 pm
Anderson v. [read post]
18 Dec 2022, 3:52 pm
” We are now half a century since occupational exposures to various asbestos fibers came under general federal regulatory control, with regulatory requirements that employers warn their employees about the hazards involved with asbestos exposure. [read post]
1 Sep 2022, 11:38 am
” The case is Garcia, et al. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 6:23 am
Hardwick’s employment working at gay bars wouldn’t be jeopardized by bringing such a case, and unlike most sodomy cases at the time, Michael Hardwick was arrested in the bedroom of his own home (Anderson, 84). [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:37 am
Anderson v. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
6 May 2022, 4:00 am
National/Federal A Decision to Overturn Roe v. [read post]
16 Mar 2022, 12:14 pm
Ross Anderson, who took senior status. [read post]
13 Aug 2021, 7:42 am
The seminal case in pension forfeiture matters is Uricoli v. [read post]
9 May 2021, 4:48 am
” McLauchlan v. [read post]
1 Mar 2021, 4:38 am
” Remillard v. [read post]
