Search for: "State v. Fair" Results 201 - 220 of 30,300
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Dec 2023, 3:30 pm by Matt Miller, Registered Patent Attorney
The textbook case on this issue is Harper & Row v. [read post]
28 Aug 2009, 4:09 am
States and political subdivisions of states are not employers within the meaning of the National Labor Relations ActFord v D.C. 37 Union Local 1549, CA2d Circuit, Docket No. 08-2317-cvRoxanne Ford appealed a judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New dismissing her complaint alleging that DC-37 breached the duty of fair representation.Ford, however, had filed her claims against DC-37 pursuant to the federal Labor… [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 3:40 am by Rosalind English
Andrew Crosbie v Secretary of State for Defence [2011] EWHC 879 (Admin) – Read judgment The Administrative Court has ruled that the employment of an army chaplain involves a “a special bond of trust and loyalty” between employee and state such that the full panoply of fair trial rights under Article 6 could not apply. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 4:33 pm by Samantha Maddern and Patrick Williams
In Cheek v ELB Pty Ltd,[1] the Commission took a close look at just what a ‘fair go’ means in finding the dismissal for a valid reason to be unfair. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 5:00 pm by Zachary Spilman
But then Judge Erdmann does something that I’m going to call less-than-fair: As we explained in United States v. [read post]
25 Jul 2011, 3:32 am by tracey
Drake v Harvey and others [2011] EWCA Civ 838;  [2011] WLR (D)  244 “There was no general default rule or presumption that the basis on which an outgoing partner’s share of partnership assets was to be determined was a fair value unless the partnership deed expressly stated otherwise; the correct approach was to derive the basis of valuation from the terms of the deed itself applying normal principles of contractual… [read post]
10 Mar 2022, 9:20 am by Brooke Miller
  This decision found, in effect, that the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and its State law counterpart, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), do not protect established minority-majority communities against displacement due to gentrification. [read post]