Search for: "Grant v. Board of Retirement"
Results 321 - 340
of 1,025
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jul 2017, 6:00 am
Considering breaks in service in determining seniority for the purposes of layoff and reinstatement 2017 NY Slip Op 05657, Appellate Division, Third DepartmentAppeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court Ulster County granting petitioner's [Petitioner] application in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78 seeking to annul a determination of the Board of Education denying Petitioner's request for certain seniority rights.The Petitioner in action was elementary teacher and… [read post]
13 Aug 2011, 8:34 am
In Sullivan v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 7:01 am
TIME discusses one of last week’s grants, Blueford v. [read post]
3 Jan 2022, 12:23 pm
In Espinoza v. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 7:51 am
Two years later, in McDonald v. [read post]
20 Sep 2018, 7:17 am
Pendant la procédure de recours, l'opposante a retiré son opposition (lettre du 15 septembre 2015). [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 9:02 am
In Bittman v. [read post]
18 Oct 2012, 7:01 am
The injured worker in Krushauskas v. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 5:21 am
(citing Sheng v. [read post]
25 Oct 2009, 3:10 pm
Ryan, 970 A. 2d 2235 (Del. 2009) and the Court of Chancery’s decision in Wayne County Employees’ Retirement Systems. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2007, 10:27 am
Then Chief Justice Carson announced his retirement. [read post]
26 Aug 2015, 11:51 am
Friedrichs v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
The court granted the motion, saying “Although copyright is a strict liability statute, there should still be some element of volition or causation which is lacking where a defendant&rs [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 7:00 am
 If certiorari is granted, the case will join Kiyemba v. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 2:38 pm
Johnson v. [read post]
2 Jul 2013, 3:57 am
Chandrakumar v. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 11:23 pm
In Retirement Board of Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund of City of Chicago v. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]