0 results for 'undefined'
Court Officials Play Defense in Harassment Case
A former court reporter's sexual harassment complaint against the Connecticut Judicial Branch can proceed, despite branch officials' argument that the alleged harassment wasn't severe enough to create a hostile work environment. U.S. District Judge Alan H. Nevas found the issue of whether court officials took plaintiff Frances Ayers' complaint seriously enough is a matter for a jury to decide.NY Lawyer Busted in Mortgage Scam Now Faces Possible Sanction for Re-Filing Suit
Fla. state Democratic chair wants probe of GOP
Florida Democratic Party Chair Karen Thurman is looking for help in persuading Attorney General Bill McCollum to investigate possible criminal activity in the Republican Party.Burford Capital, the world's biggest litigation financing company, is getting bigger.
Partners Who Left Jenkens Forfeited Capital Contributions
Beginning in 2004, partners at Jenkens & Gilchrist who left the firm also left behind their capital contributions due to the firm's "contingent liabilities." Those attorneys may never see a penny of it, or they may recoup some of it, depending on what's left over after the firm covers its financial obligations since its closing last month. Roger Hayse, a former executive at Jenkens who returned to take the job of president as it liquidates, says "job one" is making sure all of the firm's creditors are paid.View more book results for the query "*"
Attorney Recertifications — January 2011 thru November 2016
Notice to the bar.Discovery Rule Doesn't Toll N.J. Statute Pending Medical Records Review
The New Jersey Supreme Court has given little quarter to late filers of medical malpractice claims, holding that the discovery rule - which can delay the accrual date until a party discovers or should have discovered an actionable claim - is not a license to fish endlessly through medical records before filing suit.High Court Bolsters Anti-SLAPP Protections
Those seeking to dismiss a suit using the state's anti-SLAPP law don't need to prove the suit is intended to chill their First Amendment rights, the California Supreme Court held Thursday. In the first of three SLAPP law rulings issued Thursday, the justices unanimously concluded that an intent-to-chill requirement "would contravene the legislative intent" behind the anti-SLAPP law.Trending Stories
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
Data Management and Analytics: The Key to Success for Legal Operations
Brought to you by DiliTrust
Download Now
Small Law Firm Playbook: The Expert's Guide to Getting the Most Out of Legal Software
Brought to you by PracticePanther
Download Now
Strong & Hanni Solves Storage Woes--Learn How You Can, Too
Brought to you by Filevine
Download Now
Meeting the Requirements of California's SB 553: Workplace Violence Prevention
Brought to you by NAVEX Global
Download Now