Search for: "Counts v. Employment Dept." Results 21 - 40 of 87
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Jan 2023, 6:12 am by Dan Bressler
“Attorney Censured Over Conflict of Interest in Steering Clients to Employer’s Title Company” — “A New Jersey attorney has been censured for multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, including one count that alleged he steered 19 clients to use his employer, All-Pro Title Group, for real estate closings without written permission waiving the conflict of interest or providing them the opportunity to employ another title company. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 3:47 am
" The Court held open the possibility of "eccentric cases" in which the employee makes clear his approval of the conduct in conveying the information (for example, describing a racist joke as hilarious probably wouldn't count as opposing the joke-telling).o o January 26, 2009 decision hereo o SCOTUS docket hereo o SCOTUSwiki here14 Penn Plaza LLC v. [read post]
22 Feb 2010, 9:11 pm
People v Myles, 58 AD3d 889, 890-892 [3d Dept 2009] [a consumer of electricity could be guilty of falsifying business records for bypassing the electric meter, causing it to falsely record the amount of electricity used]; People v Johnson, 39 AD3d 338, 339 [1st Dept 2007] [a co-defendant of public assistance applicant could be guilty of falsifying business records of the agency]; People v Smith, 300 AD2d 1145, 1146 [4th Dept 2002]… [read post]
15 May 2013, 6:55 am by Joel R. Brandes
 She reached the same result here and rejected the counting of waking hours as a method of determining who is the custodial parent. [read post]
9 May 2011, 7:25 pm by David O'Brien
[via Ars Technica] [complaint] Violating an employer’s internet use policy can be a felony, according to the 9th Circuit in U.S. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 5:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
 This, said the Commissioner, appeared to be a question of first impression and neither party has cited to a prior decision that squarely addresses this issue nor could the Commissioner find one.Although Minisink cited Matter of Kelley, 19 Ed Dept Rep 499, aff’d sub. nom.; Kelley v. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
As the Appellate Division ruled in Matter of Loren v New York City Dept. of Educ., 126 AD3d 419, an individual appointed subject to the satisfactory completion of a training period has no greater rights than those of a probationary employee.In Loren, the appointee [Trainee] had been accepted into a seven-week pre-service training period. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 8:55 am
Alabama Dept. of Transportation, which gave employers hope that all is not lost when considering terminating a chronic complainer. [read post]