Search for: "Governing Board v. Commission on Professional Competence"
Results 1 - 20
of 133
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Aug 2015, 9:30 pm
In North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 5:41 pm
The Commission may have added this explanation in response to J-M Manufacturing v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 7:40 am
Switzer and Davis v. [read post]
14 Mar 2015, 7:56 pm
North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 9:11 am
On October 20, 2016, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) jointly issued their “Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 11:06 pm
But sometimes the government is all that keeps them from disappearing or having to compete. [read post]
27 Jan 2017, 9:11 am
On October 20, 2016, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) jointly issued their “Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 5:43 am
States have a patchwork of exceptions to their general statutory or common-law rules governing non-competes. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 3:06 pm
Shared with permission,* the announcement and a copy of the recently adopted proposal may be useful for cybersecurity, information governance, and legal discovery professionals in the eDiscovery ecosystem dealing with sensitive health data. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 11:51 am
Supreme Court case about a professional licensing board comprising dentists who used their state government power to attempt to thwart competition from non-dentist teeth whiteners. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 12:41 am
Bona Law also filed an amicus brief in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
14 Mar 2015, 7:56 pm
North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 5:53 pm
--Whitman v. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 10:33 am
A particularly compelling passage (most internal citations omitted) appears here: The Board’s mission is said to demand both “technical competence” and “apolitical expertise,” and its powers may only be exercised by “technical professional experts. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 6:33 am
Emmerich, Sabastian V. [read post]
26 Sep 2023, 11:00 am
Amazon, 2023 FC 1156 and Watson v. [read post]
22 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
§1983 (“section 1983”),[4] and, for that matter, the Fourteenth Amendment’s “state action” requirement.[5] The Court framed the issue before it as a choice between two competing standards. [read post]
21 Sep 2019, 4:03 pm
Katz in a widely read blog entitled Access Copyright v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
If employed, the individual is either working in the private sector or the public sector.[3] Excluding the federal government and interstate compact commissions and authorities, if serving in the public sector in New York State the individual is either in the State’s military service[4] or its civil service. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
If employed, the individual is either working in the private sector or the public sector.[3] Excluding the federal government and interstate compact commissions and authorities, if serving in the public sector in New York State the individual is either in the State’s military service[4] or its civil service. [read post]
