Search for: "United States v. Union Manufacturing Co." Results 21 - 40 of 299
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
In addition to the temporal disconnect, the majority gave virtually no consideration to the three-way relationship between the product supplier defendants, the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs’ employer, the United States government. [read post]
2 Mar 2016, 5:00 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Employer and union sponsored group health plans covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and their insurers are not required to comply with a Vermont state law that requires health insurers and certain other parties to report payments relating to health care claims and other information relating to health care services to a state agency for compilation in an all-inclusive health care database, according to the United States… [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 6:24 am by Heidi Henson
To resolve this problem, DuPont and the union agreed to a process whereby unit employees had to choose to either stay with DuPont and transfer to another unit, or stay in the unit and be covered by a new CBA. [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 12:20 pm by Schachtman
In 1982, JM sold the Stockton facility to the J-M Manufacturing Co., and the J-M A/C Pipe Corp., which were unaffiliated with JM. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 5:55 am by Barbara Bavis
  Further, the United States Supreme Court recently heard arguments in Vance v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 2:00 am by John Day
 This group includes individuals within the United States and many foreign countries. [read post]
20 May 2019, 9:18 am by Schachtman
Co., 49 A.D.2d 250 (4th Dept. 1974) (distinguishing manufacturing and design defects, and pe [read post]