Search for: "State v. Willett" Results 61 - 80 of 247
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 May 2020, 6:06 am by Howard Friedman
However the grant came with conditions, reflecting what appears to be ongoing animosity between the church and city officials, and somewhat competing Orders by the state and the city. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 8:04 am by Amy Howe
On March 4, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in June Medical Services v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 11:22 am by Paul Willetts
The Manual states that:a written authorization respecting failure to give notice of resignation would be invalid if the amount to be deducted constituted a penalty rather than a genuine attempt to pre-estimate damages.As such, while an employer is precluded from an imposing a penalty on a departing employee, the Manual leaves open the possibility that an employer could institute a contractual mechanism to dock wages provided it was based upon a genuine (and demonstrable)… [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 5:01 am by Eugene Volokh
(I expect that, if the Fifth Circuit had certified the state law question to the Louisiana Supreme Court, as Judge Willett suggested, the Louisiana Supreme Court wouldn't have considered it, either, because Mckesson hadn't sufficiently raised it.) [read post]
16 Dec 2019, 6:42 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a revised opinion in Doe v. [read post]
5 Sep 2019, 8:59 pm by Josh Blackman
Bryant that State Senate District 22 v∂iolated the Votings Rights Act. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 11:50 am by Andrew Vey
As previously stated, if the Employer cannot measure impairment, it cannot manage risk. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 6:49 am by Paul Willetts
On January 2, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its first decision of 2019: Heller v. [read post]
1 Sep 2018, 4:26 am by SHG
New Fifth Circuit Judge Don Willett agreed with the majority that, under the current state of the law, the court was constrained to grant the defendants QI in Zadeh v. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 6:05 am by Andrew Vey
In a landmark decision, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO”) has found an employer who required job candidates to be either Canadian citizens or permanent residents liable for discrimination contrary to the Human Rights Code (the “Code”).The case in question is Haseeb v. [read post]