Search for: "SHAW v. CALIFORNIA"
Results 161 - 180
of 327
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 3:21 pm
Free food regular rate miscalculation cases have actually been around in California since the Seventies (e.g., Marshall v. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 9:05 pm
California decision on grounds other than actually liking the system of teacher tenure [Andrew Coulson, Orin Kerr, Will Baude, Larry Sand/City Journal, Eric Posner, Daniel Fisher, Richard Epstein] More cases spur criticism of zero-tolerance knife policies [WJBK, The Truth About Knives (Atiya Haynes, Dearborn Heights, Mich.); WOIO (Da'von Shaw, Bedford, Ohio] University of Oregon student government leader seeks to shut down critical blogs for being mean [Popehat] … [read post]
5 Nov 2014, 9:36 am
See Nava v. [read post]
3 Nov 2014, 2:24 pm
Supreme Court in Mach Mining v. [read post]
29 Oct 2014, 1:21 pm
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLP By Brian P. [read post]
14 Oct 2014, 5:29 pm
– Los Angeles attorney David Urban of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore on the firm’s California Public Agency Labor and Employment Blog The effect of government privatization on global M&A – Toronto attorney Sara Josselyn of Norton Rose on the firm’s blog, Deal Law Wire With Hiring On The Rise, Employers Should Review And Update Old Job Applications – Fort Lauderdale attorney Tobi Lebowitz of Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alhadeff & Sitterson on the… [read post]
8 Oct 2014, 7:59 am
The California Supreme court finally handed down some rules in 2012, in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2014, 10:21 am
The California Supreme Court has added to this line of cases in Peabody v. [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 8:13 am
With the Court expected to hear oral arguments this fall in a pair of challenges to Alabama’s redistricting plan for its state legislature, C-SPAN Radio will air the 1993 oral arguments in another important redistricting case, Shaw v. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 10:35 am
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLP By Michele Haydel Gehrke In a decision significant for employers with Bring Your Own Device (“BYOD”) policies, a California Court of Appeal held in Cochran v. [read post]
13 Aug 2014, 1:36 pm
Overton v. [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 11:40 am
It should be noted that, after this Release went to press, the California Supreme Court addressed these issues and more in detail in Duran v. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 10:00 am
For example, in Bluford v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 3:48 pm
The California Supreme Court thus recognized that its 2007 decision in Gentry v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 9:29 am
The decision in Iskanian v. [read post]
24 Jun 2014, 7:41 am
California and United States v. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 2:32 pm
Back in 2007, the California Supreme Court, in Gentry v. [read post]
23 Jun 2014, 4:29 am
Bauman, holding that the automaker could not be sued in California for injuries allegedly caused by conduct of its foreign subsidiary when that conduct took place entirely outside of the United States. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 10:14 am
Shaw, 13-897, a state-on-top habeas case that asked whether, in an ineffective assistance claim, “a state appellate court’s holding that an omitted state law issue ultimately lacked merit precludes a federal habeas court from later finding either deficient performance or prejudice” under Strickland v. [read post]
