August 27, 2015 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
C.A. 2nd;
B255862
The Second Appellate District affirmed a judgment. The court held that the California State Board of Pharmacy properly interpreted state law as holding a supervising pharmacist strictly liable for an employee’s repeated thefts of a dangerous and controlled substance, even though the pharmacist was unaware of the thefts when they occurred.
Presented by BigVoodoo
This event shines a spotlight on the individuals, teams, projects and organizations that are changing the financial industry.
BTI provides leading tax professionals from financial institutions with unmatched tools and resources.
Honoring outstanding legal achievements focused at the national level, largely around Big Law and in-house departments.
CORE RESPONSIBILITIES AND TASKS:(1) Tasks and responsibilities include:Reviewing and negotiating commercial agreements for internal business...
Boutique midtown Manhattan law firm specializing in sophisticated real estate litigation & representation of commercial and residential ...
Description: Fox Rothschild has an opening in the Boston, MA office for a Litigation Associate with 3 to 5 years of experience. The ideal ca...
