0 results for 'Rawle & Henderson'
Benefits Reinstated for Teacher Bitten While Breaking Up Fight
A Pennsylvania appellate court panel has ordered reinstated the benefits originally awarded to a Philadelphia schoolteacher who said she suffered psychologically after she was bitten on the arm while breaking up a fight between two fourth-graders. A workers' compensation judge awarded Bartholetti lost wages and medical benefits, but the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board reversed the wages award. A Commonwealth Court panel reinstated the benefits, ruling that the teacher had "shouldered her burden."Court Expands Workers' Comp Retaliation Claim to Co-Workers
An employee who is fired for refusing to dissuade a subordinate from pursuing a workers' compensation claim may now bring a wrongful discharge claim against the employer, a divided Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled in a case of first impression. The court relied on a state supreme court case that determined it's a violation of public policy for an employer to terminate an at-will employee for filing such a claim.Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection List of Ineligible Attorneys
Notice to the bar.Pa. Justices Consider Reach of at-Will Employment
Even if an employer fires a supervisor for refusing to dissuade a subordinate employee from filing a workers' compensation claim, such a termination is lawful under Pennsylvania's at-will employment doctrine, an appellant's lawyer argued this week before the state's high court. The case stems from a wrongful-discharge claim by a man who was fired for not pressuring his son into signing a release absolving the company of workers' comp liability.Justices Consider Reach of At-Will Employment
Even if an employer does fire a supervisor for refusing to dissuade a subordinate employee from filing a workers' compensation claim, such a termination is lawful under Pennsylvania's at-will employment doctrine, counsel for the appellant in Rothrock v. Rothrock Motor Sales Inc. argued yesterday before the Supreme Court.
Defense Fees Revealed! Who's in Line for Some of the $116 Million Intel's Antitrust Defense is Costing?
Publication Date: 2009-02-02 Practice Area: Industry: Court: Judge: Attorneys: For plaintiff: For defendant: Case number:
A new insurance suit shows that Intel has already received $66 million from insurers for its fees in defending the AMD antitrust case. And it wants $50 million more. Who's getting all that dough?
Boodoo v Albee Dental Care
Publication Date: 2009-11-10 Practice Area:
Industry: Court: Appellate Division, 2nd Dept Judge: Attorneys: For plaintiff: For defendant: Case number: 2008-08913
Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department JOSEPH COVELLO, J.P. FRED T. SANTUCCI CHERYL E. CHAMBERS PLUMMER E.
Tucker v Bay Shore Stor. Warehouse, Inc.
Publication Date: 2010-01-05 Practice Area:
Industry: Court: Appellate Division, 2nd Dept Judge: Attorneys: For plaintiff: For defendant: Case number: 2009-02700
Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department PETER B. SKELOS, J.P. ANITA R. FLORIO RUTH C. BALKIN ARIEL E. BELEN
TRENDING STORIES
More from ALM
- Holwell Shuster & Goldberg Partners Leverage 'Hostile' Witnesses to Secure $101 Million Verdict Against Walmart 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Mike Andolina, Partner, White & Case 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Carolyn Burbrink, Uber Director of Volume Mobility Safety and Insurance Litigation 1 minute read
Resources
Creating a Culture of Compliance
Brought to you by Ironclad
Download Now
A Buyer's Guide to Law Firm Software
Brought to you by PracticePanther
Download Now
A Step-by-Step Flight Plan for Legal Teams: Fire Up Your Productivity Engine and Deliver High-Impact Work Faster
Brought to you by HaystackID
Download Now
Corporate Transparency Act Resource Kit
Brought to you by Wolters Kluwer
Download Now