Search for: "Doe v. Pak" Results 21 - 40 of 47
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Sep 2014, 7:00 am by Joy Waltemath
Even though the court struck the plaintiffs’ allegations regarding class certification requirements, it found it was premature to rule out class certification and allowed the plaintiffs to once again amend their complaint (Lucas v Vee Pak, Inc, September 17, 2014, Tharp, J). [read post]
23 May 2014, 4:23 am by David DePaolo
PAK Foods filed a motion to compel arbitration which was denied by the trial court. [read post]
6 Aug 2013, 12:13 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
In a DJ action, infringement under DOE was found, which was affirmed by the CAFC. [read post]
6 Jul 2013, 12:22 am by Mark Summerfield
Enviro Pak Pty Ltd v New Horticulture Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 306 (2 April 2013)Enviro Pak Pty Ltd v New Horticulture Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 624 (25 June 2013)It is not common for the Federal Court of Australia to allow a corporation to be represented by a non-lawyer. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 2:17 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Plasti- pak Packaging, Inc., 415 F.3d 1335, 1345 (Fed. [read post]
2 Mar 2010, 3:12 am
Appealing an administrative decision as provided in a CBA does not toll the Statute of Limitations for filing an Article 78 actionPak v New York City Dept. of Educ., 22 Misc 3d 1117(A)Kifan Pak, a probationary teacher, was told that he would be terminated from his position effective February 28, 2007. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 11:14 am
 For example, in Yellow Cab Co. of Sacramento v. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 11:14 am
For example, in Yellow Cab Co. of Sacramento v. [read post]