Search for: "Haug v. Haug"
Results 1 - 20
of 57
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that contrary to the Employee's contention, the record before the hearing officer contained substantial evidence to sustain the findings of misconduct and, citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d at 1046, and, contrary to the Employee's assertion, noted that "hearsay statements ... were admissible" in a Civil Service Law §75 administrative disciplinary action. [read post]
24 Aug 2023, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division opined that contrary to the Employee's contention, the record before the hearing officer contained substantial evidence to sustain the findings of misconduct and, citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d at 1046, and, contrary to the Employee's assertion, noted that "hearsay statements ... were admissible" in a Civil Service Law §75 administrative disciplinary action. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 5:05 am
" Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division explained that "[T]he substantial evidence standard is a minimal standard" that is "less than a preponderance of the evidence, and demands only that a given inference is reasonable and plausible, not necessarily the most probable. [read post]
1 Aug 2022, 5:05 am
" Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division explained that "[T]he substantial evidence standard is a minimal standard" that is "less than a preponderance of the evidence, and demands only that a given inference is reasonable and plausible, not necessarily the most probable. [read post]
2 Nov 2021, 11:30 pm
Haug's advice. [read post]
25 Jul 2021, 11:16 am
March v. [read post]
25 Jul 2021, 11:16 am
March v. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 10:14 am
” Friedrich v. [read post]
1 Jan 2021, 8:14 am
Press v. [read post]
30 May 2020, 4:12 pm
La notificación, denominado “comunicación oficial” por el Código Procesal Penal, se realiza a instancia de la Autoridad Central y por la vía diplomática. [read post]
26 Nov 2019, 9:38 am
Instead, citing Middlesex County v. [read post]
9 Nov 2019, 11:09 am
Teller v. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 7:15 am
In 89 Water Street Associates LLC v. [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 6:00 am
"In contrast the System's board-certified orthopedic surgeon conducted an independent medical examination of Trooper and after a physical examination of Trooper, a review of his medical records and consideration of Trooper's "subjective complaints" opined that Trooper is not permanently disabled or incapable of performing the duties of a state trooper.In response to Trooper's contention that the hearsay evidence contained in the report of the Retirement System's… [read post]
7 Oct 2019, 6:00 am
"In contrast the System's board-certified orthopedic surgeon conducted an independent medical examination of Trooper and after a physical examination of Trooper, a review of his medical records and consideration of Trooper's "subjective complaints" opined that Trooper is not permanently disabled or incapable of performing the duties of a state trooper.In response to Trooper's contention that the hearsay evidence contained in the report of the Retirement System's… [read post]
27 Jun 2019, 4:00 am
" Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the court opined that when reviewing an administrative determination rendered after a hearing that is required by law, the court's standard is whether the determination "is, on the entire record, supported by substantial evidence" which is a "minimal standard ... demand[ing] only that a given inference is reasonable and plausible, not necessarily the most probable. [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:00 am
The complaint (full text) in Hauge v. [read post]
2 May 2019, 10:48 am
Murphy (Haug Partners LLP, New York) agreed, noting that because estoppel now has “more teeth”, stays are more likely to be granted. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
As a question of substantial evidence was raised by Petitioner, the proceeding was transferred to the Appellate Division.Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division noted that the Court of Appeals had recently reviewed the principles governing judicial review of administrative determinations under the substantial evidence standard and noted that, as relevant in this action, the high court had emphasized that "the… [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
As a question of substantial evidence was raised by Petitioner, the proceeding was transferred to the Appellate Division.Citing Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam, 32 NY3d 1044, the Appellate Division noted that the Court of Appeals had recently reviewed the principles governing judicial review of administrative determinations under the substantial evidence standard and noted that, as relevant in this action, the high court had emphasized that "the… [read post]
