Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In United States federal courts, involuntary dismissal is governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rule 41(b). Involuntary dismissal is made by a defendant through a motion for dismissal, on grounds that plaintiff is not prosecuting the case, is not complying with a court order, or to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
In law, wrongful dismissal, also called wrongful termination or wrongful discharge, is a situation in which an employee's contract of employment has been terminated by the employer, where the termination breaches one or more terms of the contract of employment, or a statute provision or rule in employment law.
The damages plaintiff sustained by this illegal dismissal were (1.) the wages for the period of six months during which his formal notice would have been current; (2.) the profits or commission which would, in all reasonable probability, have been earned by him during the six months had he continued in the employment; and possibly (3.) damages ...
Whether this ground of restitution only applies to money claims or also extends to non-money benefits (e.g., chattels, services); Whether this ground of restitution can be relied upon by a contract-breaker; Whether the (now ineffective) contract has any impact upon (a) the availability of a claim; or (b) the valuation of any such claim;
If you were affected, you can file a claim at this site with your computer’s serial number and proof of repairs. Synchrony Bank Total settlement: $2.6 million.
President-elect Trump’s attorneys signaled an effort to try to run out the clock on his New York hush money case, asking Judge Juan Merchan for a month to mount a formal effort to dismiss his ...
The Education Department may also try, in the last month under Biden, to clear the loans of those experiencing financial hardship through a second rule also under OMB review, experts say.
City of Los Angeles Dep't of Water & Power v. Manhart, 435 U.S. 702 (1978) is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that employers cannot charge women more for pension benefits, despite women living longer than men, on average, and therefore receiving more retirement benefits.