Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In November 2006, Arizona voters rejected Proposition 107, which would have banned same-sex marriage and any legal status similar to marriage (such as civil unions or domestic partnerships). Two years later, however, Arizona voters approved a less restrictive Proposition 102 which amended the Constitution to ban the recognition of same-sex ...
The District was established on June 20, 1910, pending Arizona statehood on February 14, 1912. [1] The United States Attorney's Office for the District of Arizona represents the United States in civil and criminal litigation in the court. As of November 2021 the United States attorney is Gary M. Restaino. [2]
The Hacienda HealthCare sexual abuse case was a high-profile sexual abuse case involving an incapacitated disabled woman who was raped many times and impregnated by a licensed practical nurse at the Hacienda HealthCare facility in Phoenix, Arizona, United States. Although the investigation took place in 2021, the sexual abuse was long term, and ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Importantly, the hostile work environment is gender neutral, that is, men can sexually harass men or women and women can sexually harass men or women. Likewise, a hostile work environment can be considered the "adverse employment action" that is an element of a whistleblower claim or a reprisal (retaliation) claim under a civil rights statute ...
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has closed a complaint and will not penalize Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina for placing most HIV medication in its most costly drug ...
Your Rights At Work (Connecticut) Barnes, Patricia G., (2014), Betrayed: The Legalization of Age Discrimination in the Workplace. The author, an attorney and judge, argues that the U.S. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 fails to protect older workers. Weak to begin with, she states that the ADEA has been eviscerated by the U.S ...
The Arizona Supreme Court’s holding below—that Lynch v. Arizona, 578 U.S. 613, did not represent a “significant change in the law” for purposes of permitting Cruz to file a successive petition for state postconviction relief under Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1(g)—is not an adequate state-law ground supporting that judgment.