Search for: "Doe v. Walmart"
Results 21 - 40
of 373
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Apr 2015, 1:20 pm
In Nightingale v. [read post]
27 Jun 2014, 9:05 am
368; Delisle v. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 6:58 am
Walmart’s salary-setting criteria. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 7:47 am
(Normand v. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 6:08 pm
Why does it matter? [read post]
13 Sep 2016, 6:02 am
Pursuant to Walmart’s disciplinary policy, an employee receives a “coaching” if her job performance does not meet the store’s expectations or otherwise violates it policies or procedures. [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 7:56 am
It did so, in large part, due to the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Huff v. [read post]
4 Apr 2018, 6:34 am
But, noted the court, Walmart does more business and hires more workers in Illinois than in almost every other state in the country, including its two “paradigmatic” home states. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 7:08 pm
[it] appears that in order to be able to work physically she does need to be medicated. [read post]
9 Jul 2015, 12:18 pm
Appellate procedure — Mootness — Grant of permanent injunction The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (the “Union”), Organized United for Respect at Walmart, Jobs With Justice, Alan Hanson, Sylvia Fabela, and Does 1-10 (collectively, the “Protestors”) appeal from a preliminary injunction entered by the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County that enjoined them ... [read post]
12 May 2016, 12:45 pm
In Owens v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 1:24 pm
Regards, Roy] Walmart v. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 8:35 am
LLC, and Chance v. [read post]
3 May 2018, 5:01 am
Jablonski v. [read post]
4 Feb 2020, 7:17 am
And while Walmart explained that the new schedule was based on customer traffic and was designed to meet specific customer and operational demand, “that Walmart’s computer analytics showed a need for a Sales Associate between 4:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., however, does not mean that [the employee] needed to be that Sales Associate,” said the court. [read post]
2 May 2016, 7:49 am
Walmart next argued that her failure-to-promote claim was time-barred because failure-to-promote claims for which “objective application data” does not exist were not previously certified as a part of the class action. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 11:34 am
WalMart (now called WalMart v. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 2:11 pm
In a long awaited decision, the Ninth Circuit finally issued its en banc opinion in Dukes v. [read post]
6 May 2016, 6:26 am
Nor was summary judgment warranted on her claim against the assistant manager for tortious interference with contract (Morris v. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 3:35 am
Doe I v. [read post]
