Search for: "Christopher v. SmithKline Beecham Corp" Results 41 - 60 of 97
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Mar 2011, 8:09 am by Keith Reinfeld
SmithKline Beecham Corp., that a proposed class of pharmaceutical sales representatives (“Sales Reps”) were exempt from overtime pay pursuant to the “outside sales exemption. [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 6:51 am by Nabiha Syed
Bloomberg’s Greg Stohr also provides coverage of the grant in Christopher v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 10:03 am by Lyle Denniston
SmithKline Beecham Corp. – eligibility of “outside salesmen” of pharmaceutical companies for overtime pay Tues., April 17: 11-5683 — Dorsey v. [read post]
27 Jan 2012, 6:00 am by Keith Reinfeld
SmithKline Beecham Corp., that held a proposed class of pharmaceutical sales representatives to be exempt from overtime pay pursuant to the “outside sales exemption. [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 8:51 am by Frank Steinberg
SmithKline Beecham Corp. is the Supreme Court's resolution of the conflict. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 10:34 am by Leigh Anne Benedic
SmithKline Beecham Corp., where it held that GlaxoSmithKline's PSRs were properly classified as exempt. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 7:30 am by Conor McEvily
SmithKline Beecham Corp. in which the Court will consider whether the Fair Labor Standards Act’s “outside sales exemption” applies to pharmaceutical sales representatives. [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 5:47 am by My name
SILVERMAN ON JUNE 21, 2012 In Christopher, et al. v. [read post]