Search for: "HIATT v. HIATT"
Results 1 - 20
of 27
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2016, 4:30 am
Facts: Husband and Wife divorced in 2007 after 20 years of marriage. [read post]
1 Feb 2016, 4:30 am
Facts: Husband and Wife divorced in 2007 after 20 years of marriage. [read post]
3 Jun 2017, 4:05 pm
Colorado Seminary (10th Circuit, June 2, 2017) (affirming summary judgment against Hiatt on her sexual discrimination and retaliation claims: Hiatt failed to show defendant's actions were pretext for either discrimination or retaliation)Workers Compensation/Occupational Safety and DiseaseBNSF Railway Co. v. [read post]
23 Jul 2014, 1:10 pm
In Coach, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 10:31 am
BNSF Railway Company (Motion to Compel Arbitation; Damages) Simms-Hiatt v. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 5:18 pm
In 2006, the Supreme Court decided Hamdan v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 7:00 am
It declined to do so in Hiatt v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 7:00 am
It declined to do so in Hiatt v. [read post]
21 Sep 2007, 10:22 am
Hiatt v. [read post]
28 Sep 2008, 12:36 am
Hiatt, 184 N.C. [read post]
25 Jan 2020, 1:59 pm
Jen Patja Howell shared the latest edition of the "Arbiters of Truth" series from the Lawfare Podcast, in which Quinta Jurecic and Alina Polyakova spoke with Renee DiResta, the technical research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory, about disinformation campaigns and their various different forms: David V. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 6:13 am
Lyle Denniston covered the request in Friedrichs v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 5:59 am
Hiatt, 184 N.C. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 5:59 am
Hiatt, 184 N.C. [read post]
13 Jun 2017, 12:45 pm
Hiatt, 103 N.C. [read post]
7 Jun 2014, 6:21 am
The Supreme Court reached a decision in Bond v. [read post]
14 Jul 2022, 3:17 pm
Hiatt, 98 N.C. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 5:32 am
Affirming summary judgment in the employer’s favor on her Title VII and Title IX discrimination and retaliation claims, the appeals court was struck by the employer’s consistency throughout as to its reasons for demoting her: most of her assigned supervisees no longer wanted to be supervised by her; she had entered an ethical “grey area,” reflecting a lack of professional judgment; and she failed to take personal responsibility for why her students were in… [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 5:50 am
Hiatt, we held that a violation of a work policy prohibiting excessive garnishments was not misconduct connected with the employee's work. [read post]
