Epstein Secrets

which "provides that a rate filed with and approved by a governing regulatory agency is unassailable in judicial proceedings brought by ratepayers." Clark v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 736 F. Supp. 2d 902, 913 (D.N.J. 2010) (citing Alston v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 585 F.3d 753, 763 (3d Cir. 2009)).

origin." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2. The promotions claim first alleges a pattern or practice of racially disparate treatment in promotions decisions. See Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 336, 97 S. Ct. 1843, 52 L. Ed. 2d 396 (1977). Second, it charges that Nucor's facially neutral promotions policies

is." Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977, 995 n.3, 108 S. Ct. 2777, 101 L. Ed. 2d 827 (1988) (plurality opinion); see also Intl Bhd. of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324, 340, 97 S. Ct. 1843, 52 L. Ed. 2d 396 (1977) . Neither "courts [n]or defendants [are] obliged to assume that plaint

ug Enforcement Administration his fi- nanci►l dealings with respect to his it legal drug deals. HATCHETT, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I join Judge Clark's dissent. The agree- ment in this case coven the subject funds. I hasten to add that nothing is gained by encouraging the government to enter into

s to afford no reasonable basis for board's conclusion that they resulted in dissipa- tion of union's majority. Order accordingly. 1. Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers Local Union 215. s/w International Brother. L. FRANK, INO. 35 KIM 35 (1965) Labor Relations 4=389 Employer's general manager's re-

.’ ”’ Id. at 674-75 (emphasis added) (quoting Radio Officers’ Union v. NLEBB, 347 U.S. 17, 42-43 (1954)). Since the hiring hall agreement at issue in Teamsters 357 “specifically provide[d] that there will be no discrimination * * * because of the presence or absence of union membership,” the Court determined

d)); Hallstrom v. Tillamook County, 493 U.S. 20, 27 (1989) (“The running of such statutes is traditionally subject to equitable tolling.’’); Honda v. Clark, 386 U.S. 484, 501 (1967); Glus v. Brooklyn E.D. Terminal, 359 U.S. 231, 232-33 (1959) (equitable tolling of statutes of limitations is “[d]eeply roo