Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014), is a landmark decision [1] [2] in United States corporate law by the United States Supreme Court allowing privately held for-profit corporations to be exempt from a regulation that its owners religiously object to, if there is a less restrictive means of furthering the law's interest, according to the provisions of the Religious Freedom ...
[20] The Court held that there was a substantial burden, saying, "Because the contraceptive mandate forces them to pay an enormous sum of money—as much as $475 million per year in the case of Hobby Lobby—if they insist on providing insurance coverage in accordance with their religious beliefs, the mandate clearly imposes a substantial ...
Many of these cases have lead to class action lawsuits and proceedings by the Federal Trade Commision (FTC), resulting in a number of settlements worth millions — or even billions — of dollars ...
Zubik v. Burwell, 578 U.S. 403 (2016), was a case before the United States Supreme Court on whether religious institutions other than churches should be exempt from the contraceptive mandate, a regulation adopted by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires non-church employers to cover certain contraceptives for their ...
An HR specialist told her the dog was a “safety hazard,” according to a federal lawsuit. Skip to main content. 24/7 Help. For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways ...
United States Department of Health and Human Services, 682 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2006): Federal prohibition on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Cook v. Gates , 528 F.3d 42 (1st Cir. 2008): " Don't ask, Don't tell " policy upheld against due process and equal protection Fifth Amendment challenges and a free speech challenge under the First ...
More than 90% of patients who appealed the nH Predict's claim denial had the decision overturned, according to the lawsuit. But the plaintiffs claim the health care companies knew only a tiny ...
King v. Burwell, 576 U.S. 473 (2015), was a 6–3 decision by the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).