Search for: "Johnson v. SmithKline Beecham Corp." Results 1 - 20 of 35
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Apr 2012, 10:36 am by Bexis
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 2012 WL 1057435 (E.D. [read post]
1 Oct 2013, 7:25 am
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 724 F.3d 337 (3d Cir. 2013) (lauded here), and Moore v. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 2:31 pm by Bexis
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 658 N.W.2d 127 (Mich. 2003)) or the Sixth Circuit (Garcia v. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 12:46 pm by Robin E. Shea
SmithKline Beecham Corp., which held that pharmaceutical reps are subject to the "outside sales" exemption to the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 8:59 am by Kara M. Maciel
SmithKline Beecham Corp., for example, rejected the argument that pharmaceutical sales representatives did not qualify for the Outside Sales exemption.  [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 8:59 am by <a href=''>Kara M. Maciel</a>
SmithKline Beecham Corp., for example, rejected the argument that pharmaceutical sales representatives did not qualify for the Outside Sales exemption. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 1:23 pm by Jason Rantanen
Cir. 2006) (en banc in part) SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 6:19 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 960 F.2d 294, 298 (2d Cir.1992), and “persuasiveness” is a question for a factfinder. [read post]
6 May 2016, 5:20 am by John Elwood
SmithKline Beecham Corp. [read post]