C.A. 2nd;
B256744
The Second Appellate District affirmed in part and reversed in part a judgment. The court held that rest-period requirements of an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order did not apply to a county’s public transit operators.
December 18, 2015 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
C.A. 2nd;
B256744
The Second Appellate District affirmed in part and reversed in part a judgment. The court held that rest-period requirements of an Industrial Welfare Commission wage order did not apply to a county’s public transit operators.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Celebrating California law firms and legal departments driving the state's dynamic legal landscape.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
Company DescriptionA prominent boutique AV rated Education Law firm located in Westbury, New York. Our firm specializes in education law, sp...
Seeking motivated and skilled litigation attorney to join our dynamic defense litigation firm. Role Involves:Conducting thorough research.Ha...
DEPUTY PORT ATTORNEY III Oakland, CA Salary: $17,294 - $21,419/month, 37.5-hr work week Your Port. Your Community. Your Career. Whe...