The general design and duties of the Bureau of Labor Statistics shall be to acquire and diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects connected with labor, in the most general and comprehensive sense of that word, and especially upon its relation to capital, the hours of labor, the earnings of laboring men and women, and the means of promoting their material, social, intellectual, and moral prosperity.
Notes of Decisions
Gonzalez Villanueva v. Warner Lambert, 339 F. Supp. 2d 351 (D.P.R. 2004).
· cites it 4× “29 U.S.C. § 1 132(a)(3)(B). This provision permits relief against a plan administrator for breaches of the fiduciary duties imposed by ERISA.”
Robert F. Kennedy Med. Ctr. v. Belshe, 919 P.2d 721 (Cal. 1996).
· cites it 2× “) The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor (see 29 U.S.C. §§ 1 , 2) calculates consumer and producer price indices monthly or annually.”
Torres-Negron v. Ramallo Bros. Printing, Inc., 203 F. Supp. 2d 120 (D.P.R. 2002).
· cites it 2× “29 U.S.C. § 1 166(a)(2). The administrator then has fourteen days to notify the qualified beneficiary of his/her right to continue coverage.”
Chindarah v. Pick Up Stix, Inc., 171 Cal. App. 4th 796 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009).
“) The Chindarah plaintiffs urge us to look at the law under the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA) ( 29 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.), pointing out that the FLSA has been interpreted as prohibiting employers from obtaining releases of wage claims directly from employees, including claims…”
Schoemann Ex Rel. Schoemann v. Excellus Health Plan, Inc., 447 F. Supp. 2d 1000 (D. Minn. 2006).
“Excellus argues that venue does not lie in the District of Minnesota under ERISA’s venue provision, 29 U.S.C. § 1 132(e)(2). Excel-lus further argues that, even if venue does lie in Minnesota, the action should nevertheless be transferred to New York pursuant to the Plan’s…”
Watson v. Deaconess Waltham Hosp., 141 F. Supp. 2d 145 (D. Mass. 2001).
“The legislative history of ERISA, when viewed in light of the parallel history of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, now codified at 42 U.”
Bolduc v. Nat'l Semiconductor Corp., 35 F. Supp. 2d 106 (D. Me. 1998).
“In his Complaint, Bolduc alleges that Nation *109 al violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 1 (“FLSA”), and Maine’s state counterpart to this law, 26 M.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.