enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Systems_Corp._v._Lewis

    Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on how two federal laws, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), relate to whether employment contracts can legally bar employees from collective arbitration.

  3. Court of Appeals Addresses CPLR 3013’s Pleading Requirements

    www.aol.com/news/court-appeals-addresses-cplr...

    In his New York Practice column, Patrick M. Connors analyzes 'Mid-Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union v. Quartararo & Lois', a case which addressed pleading requirements. Court of Appeals Addresses ...

  4. Pleading (United States) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleading_(United_States)

    The Twombly court criticized the modern notice pleading standard derived from the landmark 1957 Conley v. Gibson decision, which had ruled that a complaint should not be dismissed at the pleading stage, "unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief".

  5. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swierkiewicz_v._Sorema_N._A.

    Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506 (2002), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 26, 2002. The Court held that for complaints in employment discrimination cases, a plaintiff is not required to allege specific facts that establish a prima facie case as required by the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework.

  6. Conley v. Gibson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conley_v._Gibson

    In 2007, the United States Supreme Court overruled Conley, creating a new, stricter standard of a pleading's required specificity.Under the standard the Court set forth in Conley, a complaint need only state facts which make it "conceivable" that it could prove its legal claims—that is, that a court could only dismiss a claim if it appeared, beyond a doubt, that the plaintiff would be able ...

  7. Garcetti v. Ceballos - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos

    Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision involving First Amendment free speech protections for government employees. The plaintiff in the case was a district attorney who claimed that he had been passed up for a promotion for criticizing the legitimacy of a warrant.

  8. Procedures of the Supreme Court of the United States

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedures_of_the_Supreme...

    In nearly all of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, the Court exercises the appellate jurisdiction granted to it by Article III of the Constitution. This authority permits the Court to affirm, amend or overturn decisions made by lower courts and tribunals. Procedures for bringing cases before the Supreme Court have changed significantly over ...

  9. New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Supreme_Court...

    New York's rules of civil procedure allow for interlocutory appeals of right from nearly every order and decision of the trial court, [6] meaning that most may be appealed to the appropriate appellate department while the case is still pending in the trial court.[[Map of the four departments of the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division