Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Weeks v. United States , 232 U.S. 383 (1914) was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court unanimously held that the warrantless seizure of items from a private residence constitutes a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution . [ 1 ]
Tyonna Turner worked at Tesla's flagship Fremont, ... Tesla settles ex-worker’s lawsuit alleging she was fired after being sexually harassed 100 times. Reuters. May 13, 2024 at 2:31 PM.
At first, Chatman, then 32, didn’t mind the schedule — mandatory 12-hour shifts, six or seven days a week. “I’m a workaholic,” she said. “I’ve worked since I was 14.”
The lawsuit was brought by the EEOC’s San Francisco District Office, which has jurisdiction over Northern California, northern Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Idaho and Montana.
A lawsuit filed in March 2021 alleges that Musk violated his fiduciary duty to Tesla by continuing to send "erratic" tweets in violation of the SEC settlement, and that the board is failing to control Musk. [14] [15] The case was also stayed pending resolution of the class-action lawsuit. [16] As of March 2024, the case is unresolved. [17]
The lawsuit stated that Diaz faced constant harassment including racial slurs. According to the state's Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Fremont factory was racially segregated and Black workers testified that they were subjected to racist slurs, racial drawings, and were given the most menial [1] and physically demanding work. [2]
California Superior Court Judge Noel Wise in Oakland said in a written order issued Wednesday that the 2017 lawsuit presents questions common to the class of whether Tesla was aware of the alleged ...
"The power of Congress over Indian Affairs may be of a plenary nature, but it is not absolute." US v. Alcea Band of Tillamooks, 329 U.S. 40 (1946), 329 U.S. 54. Since the exclusion of the Kansas Delawares from distribution under the act was "tied rationally to the fulfillment of Congress' unique obligation toward the Indians," 430 U.S. 85-89, the exclusion does not offend the Due Process ...