Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “NJ Department of Labor and Workforce Development v. Jones”
Utley v. Board of Review, Department of Laborpublic domain
946 A.2d 1039 (2008) 194 N.J. 534 John M. UTLEY, Claimant-Appellant, v. BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondent-Respondent, and Myron Manufacturing Corporation, Respondent. A-126 September Term 2006 Supreme Court of New Jersey. Argued November 27, 2007. Decided May 15, 2008. *1040
Tiffany (NJ) Inc. v. eBay, Inc.public domain
576 F.Supp.2d 463 (2008) TIFFANY (NJ) INC. and Tiffany and Company, Plaintiffs, v. EBAY, INC., Defendant. No. 04 Civ. 4607(RJS). United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 14, 2008. *468 H. Peter Haveles, Jr., Esq. and James B. Swire, Esq. (Eleanor M. Lackman, *469 Esq., and Erik C. Wal
ACCEPTED 03-14-00706-CV 4055487 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
ACCEPTED 03-14-00735-CV 4703327 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-2899-17T4 KATHLEEN J. DELANOY, Plaintiff-Appellant, APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION v. January 3, 2020 APPELLATE D
ACCEPTED 03-14-00197-CV 4929353 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEX
Select Building Systems, Inc. and Tri-Bar Ranch Company, Ltd. v. Robertson Electric, Inc.public domain
FILED IN NO. 13-212 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 09/11/15 11:24:40 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk TAMI L. WOLE'F, C.S.R. PHONE: (830) 331-8286 NO. 13-212 ROBERTSON ELECTRIC, INC. ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT ) VS . ) 216TH JUD
New York v. U.S. Dep't of Commercepublic domain
JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge: *513TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND A. History and Purposes of the Census...519 B. The Secretary's Authority Over the Census...521 C. The History of a Citizenship Question on the Census...524 D. Test
Clark v. Prudential Insurance Co. of Americapublic domain
OPINION DEBEVOISE, Senior District Judge. This case concerns allegations of deception and bad faith against a health insurance company, The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”). Plaintiffs Beverly Clark, Jesse J. Paul, Warren Gold, Linda M. Cusanelli, Carole L. Walcher, and Terri L. Drogell (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) have filed a putative class action complaint against Prudenti
ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: This antitrust case requires us to apply the standards announced in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544 , 127 S.Ct.
Lourdes Medical Center v. Board of Reviewpublic domain
The opinion of the court was delivered by MINIMAN, J.A.D. After between 240 and 280 nurses employed by appellant Lourdes Medical Center of Burlington County (Lourdes) walked off the job on April 19, 2004, ninety-seven of the nurses filed for unemployment benefits on June 6, 2004. Unemployment benefits are designed to “ameliorate the impact of involuntary unemployment.” Sweeney v. Bd. of Review, 43 <
Matter of Valuation Proceedings, Etc.public domain
531 F.Supp. 1191 (1981) In the Matter of The VALUATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTIONS 303(c) AND 306 OF the REGIONAL RAIL REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1973. Misc. No. 76-1. Special Court, Regional Rail Reorganization Act. November 24, 1981. On Petitions for Reconsideration January 25, 1982. *1192 *1193
Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Ass'n v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionpublic domain
*426Justice Brennan announced the judgment of the Court and delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, III, and VI, and an opinion with respect to Parts IV, V, and VII in which Justice Marshall, Justice Blackmun, and Justice Stevens join. In 1975, petitioners were found guilty of engaging in a pattern and practice of discrimination a
SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. Elmer Branch v. Cream-O-Land Dairy (A-29-19) (083379) Argued September 30, 2020 -- Decided January 13, 2021 PATTERSON, J., writing for the Court. Plaintiff
Best v. Housing Authoritypublic domain
OPINION SIMANDLE, Chief Judge: I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff, a former employee of the Housing Authority and Urban Redevelopment Agency of the. City of Atlantic City (“ACHA”), alleges in an eight-count complaint that he was fired due to his political affiliation and in retaliation for exercising his rights under the United States and New Jersey. Constitutions and the Family and Medical Lea
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-0102-18T3 VINCENT HAGER, Petitioner-Respondent/ APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION Cross-Appellant, January 13, 2020 v. APPELLATE DIVISION
Schaefer-LaRose v. Eli Lilly & Co.public domain
679 F.3d 560 (2012) Susan SCHAEFER-LaROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ELI LILLY & COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. James Jirak, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, Cross-Appellants, v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. Nos. 10-3855, 11-1980, 11-2131. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued October 18, 2011. Decid
Adami v. Cardo Windows, Inc.public domain
OPINION SIMANDLE, Chief Judge: I. Introduction This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification of a FLSA “opt-in” collective action and certification of a Rule 23 “opt-out” state wage class action [Docket Item 43], Defendants’ motion to seal [Docket Item 66], and Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss Cardo Windows, Inc.’s counter-claims for breach of contr
Elmer Branch v. Cream-O-Land Dairypublic domain
SYLLABUS This syllabus is not part of the Court’s opinion. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Court. In the interest of brevity, portions of an opinion may not have been summarized. Elmer Branch v. Cream-O-Land Dairy (A-29-19) (083379) Argued September 30, 2020 -- Decided January 13, 2021 PATTERSON, J., writing for the Court. Plaintiff
Texas v. United Statespublic domain
Andrew S. Hanen, United States District Court Judge Eight states and two governors1 are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and ask this Court to hold that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA") program is illegal because its creation and continued existence violate the procedural and substantive aspects of the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA").