Search for: "State v. Proctor"
Results 81 - 100
of 329
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2nd Circuit “Cat’s Paw” decision highlights importance of employer investigations before termination
6 Sep 2016, 7:00 am
Supreme Court in Staub v. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 3:51 pm
Our United States Supreme Court in a case entitled Staub v. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 3:51 pm
Our United States Supreme Court in a case entitled Staub v. [read post]
1 Aug 2016, 8:28 am
Proctor & Gamble Pharm., Inc., 676 F. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 4:55 pm
Clearly, law firms are significantly behind the curve, despite law enforcement agencies and cybersecurity firms issuing repeated warnings about the risks of attacks by insiders, fraudsters, hacktivists, unscrupulous competitors and nation-states. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 4:41 am
The Trunki caseThe key cases relevant to these questions were Proctor & Gamble v Reckitt Benckiser [2007] EWCA Civ 936, in which it was held that a registered design based on a line drawing was for the shape alone, and Samsung v Apple [2012] EWCA Civ 1339, in which Apple had contended that lack of ornamentation was a feature of the simple line drawing of a tablet which they had registered as the design. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 8:57 am
Lee, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 15-326 I/P Engine, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Jan 2016, 1:41 am
In doing so, he referred to the leading authority Proctor v Bailey(1889) 42 Ch 390, which states that “… an injunction is granted for prevention, and where there is no ground for apprehending the repetition of a wrongful act there is no ground for an injunction“. [read post]
21 Dec 2015, 8:34 am
“ Lozano v. [read post]
27 Oct 2015, 10:00 am
Community Coll. v New York State Pub. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 7:18 am
Proctor Hospital, the United States Supreme Court adopted this theory of causation in employment discrimination cases. [read post]
19 Oct 2015, 3:00 am
Proctor Hospital, the United States Supreme Court adopted this theory of causation in employment discrimination cases. [read post]
28 Sep 2015, 12:19 pm
China then began rejecting all corn from the United States containing the MIR 162 trait, which persisted for over a year. [read post]
21 Sep 2015, 5:38 pm
TERRY, Appellant, v. [read post]
15 Sep 2015, 9:59 am
In Zamora v. [read post]
23 Aug 2015, 3:36 pm
One explicitly stated that he thought the plaintiff was untruthful. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 9:30 pm
Proctor. [read post]
10 May 2015, 5:48 pm
’s Office v. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 8:00 am
Fure v. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 6:12 am
Unconvinced, then, that this qualification was related to the ability to perform the telephone sales job, the majority held the would-be employer did not establish that it had an adequate reason to reject her (Adams v. [read post]
