Search for: "Smith v. Holt"
Results 21 - 40
of 51
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2009, 11:55 am
Mercy Hosp., Inc., 283 F.3d 561 (3d Cir. 2002).Fifth Circuit: Holt v. [read post]
14 Sep 2016, 8:03 am
In Holt v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:05 pm
In Holt v Board of Education, 52 NY2d 625, the Court of Appeals decided that performance evaluations and letters of criticism placed in the employee’s personnel file were not “disciplinary penalties” and thus could be placed there without having to first hold a disciplinary proceeding. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 3:12 am
One answer to this, perhaps drawing on Gillett v Holt, is that a lack of clarity can be made up by the extent of the detriment undertaken by the Claimant (?). [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 3:12 am
One answer to this, perhaps drawing on Gillett v Holt, is that a lack of clarity can be made up by the extent of the detriment undertaken by the Claimant (?). [read post]
26 Jul 2019, 7:42 am
The court could also revisit or narrow Smith in Fulton v. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 5:13 am
” No, according to the Court of Appeal's ruling in Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 6:12 am
From Gruber v. [read post]
7 Jan 2025, 8:27 am
Mahmoud v. [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 3:52 am
” Rubenstein also pointed out that in Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98, the Court of Appeals ruled that including charges concerning an employee's performance that were previously addressed in a counseling memorandum does not constitute double jeopardy. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 12:07 pm
The two leading cases specifying the “compelling state interest” test – Holt v. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 5:52 am
Smith, 451 U.S. 454, 462 (1981) (quotation and emphasis omitted). [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 11:03 am
Holt, 144 N.C. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
[Smith v Hager, 185 A.D.2d 612]Demoting an employee for sleeping on duty on two occasions, although a hearing officer found the employee’s supervisor had “condoned” such conduct and the hearing officer had recommended a suspension without pay for three weeks. [read post]
3 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
[Smith v Hager, 185 A.D.2d 612]Demoting an employee for sleeping on duty on two occasions, although a hearing officer found the employee’s supervisor had “condoned” such conduct and the hearing officer had recommended a suspension without pay for three weeks. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 2:11 pm
Case style: Neese v. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 7:38 am
Holt v. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 7:12 pm
In Roper v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am
District Court for the District of Maine Smith v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 9:08 am
District Court for the District of Maine Smith v. [read post]
