27 Cited authorities

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 216,014 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Smith v. Severn
129 F.3d 419 (7th Cir. 1997) Cited 754 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that so long as a student receives proper notice of a charge and is suspended on the basis of that charge, justifying the suspension by finding additional violations does not constitute a due process violation
Grayson v. O'Neill
308 F.3d 808 (7th Cir. 2002) Cited 451 times
Holding that appellant could not raise retaliation claim for the first time on appeal
Weisbuch v. County of Los Angeles
119 F.3d 778 (9th Cir. 1997) Cited 500 times
Holding that a policymaker's mere refusal to overrule a subordinate's completed act does not constitute approval
Saxion v. Titan-C-Manufacturing, Inc.
86 F.3d 553 (6th Cir. 1996) Cited 184 times
Holding that the language of Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(b) "clearly suggests that a court may bifurcate a trial on its own motion"
Carpenters Dist Council v. Dillard Dept Stores
15 F.3d 1275 (5th Cir. 1994) Cited 128 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that there was an “unusual organizational situation” where “the two sites were several miles apart”
Barth v. Reagan
139 Ill. 2d 399 (Ill. 1990) Cited 119 times
Finding that failure to present expert testimony is usually fatal to a legal malpractice action
Hotel Employees Local 54 v. Elsinore Shore
173 F.3d 175 (3d Cir. 1999) Cited 51 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Unforeseeable Business Circumstance exception applied even though the casino owner knew that the Casino Control Commission might revoke its license, forcing a shutdown
Roquet v. Arthur Andersen LLP
398 F.3d 585 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 27 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that in-person meeting and subsequent ongoing investigation by Department of Justice regarding company's criminal liability did not make company's indictment "probable"
Thielmann v. MF Global Holdings Ltd. (In re MF Global Holdings Ltd.)
481 B.R. 268 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2012) Cited 15 times
Holding that a complaint needed more facts to determine whether the debtors were reorganizing or liquidating
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,220 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 2101 - Definitions; exclusions from definition of loss of employment
29 U.S.C. § 2101 Cited 815 times 39 Legal Analyses
Defining "mass layoff" as "a reduction in force" that is not the result of a plant closing and "(B) results in an employment loss"
Section 2102 - Notice required before plant closings and mass layoffs
29 U.S.C. § 2102 Cited 454 times 24 Legal Analyses
Requiring notice to "chief elected official of the unit of local government within which [a covered] closing or layoff is to occur"
Section 2104 - Administration and enforcement of requirements
29 U.S.C. § 2104 Cited 350 times 8 Legal Analyses
Authorizing attorney fees to prevailing party
Section 639.9 - When may notice be given less than 60 days in advance?
20 C.F.R. § 639.9 Cited 99 times 17 Legal Analyses
Referencing " principal client's sudden and unexpected termination of a major contract with the employer" as an unforeseeable business circumstance
Section 639.7 - What must the notice contain?
20 C.F.R. § 639.7 Cited 59 times 10 Legal Analyses
Detailing the different requirements that notice to various recipients must contain

Norman B. Newman, solely as Liquidating Trustee of the World Marketing Liquidating Trust v. Crane, Heyman, Simon, Welch & Clar

27 Cited authorities

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that so long as a student receives proper notice of a charge and is suspended on the basis of that charge, justifying the suspension by finding additional violations does not constitute a due process violation

Holding that appellant could not raise retaliation claim for the first time on appeal

Holding that a policymaker's mere refusal to overrule a subordinate's completed act does not constitute approval

Holding that the language of Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(b) "clearly suggests that a court may bifurcate a trial on its own motion"

Holding that there was an “unusual organizational situation” where “the two sites were several miles apart”

Finding that failure to present expert testimony is usually fatal to a legal malpractice action

Holding that the Unforeseeable Business Circumstance exception applied even though the casino owner knew that the Casino Control Commission might revoke its license, forcing a shutdown

Holding that in-person meeting and subsequent ongoing investigation by Department of Justice regarding company's criminal liability did not make company's indictment "probable"

Holding that a complaint needed more facts to determine whether the debtors were reorganizing or liquidating

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Defining "mass layoff" as "a reduction in force" that is not the result of a plant closing and "(B) results in an employment loss"

Requiring notice to "chief elected official of the unit of local government within which [a covered] closing or layoff is to occur"

Authorizing attorney fees to prevailing party

Referencing " principal client's sudden and unexpected termination of a major contract with the employer" as an unforeseeable business circumstance

Detailing the different requirements that notice to various recipients must contain