Search for: "Court v. Administrative Office"
Results 561 - 580
of 14,554
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2010, 3:16 pm
It noted that initially the Supreme Court had rejected all of Ost’s arguments but one -- that the town had failed to set forth the rationale underlying its departure from the hearing officer’s findings and recommended penalty.Subsequently the town explained its reasons for its decision -- it found that Ost had lied about his activities in August 1995, and “his testimony regarding the earlier incident was incredible as well. [read post]
2 Nov 2020, 7:38 am
The post Another Court Rejects Trump’s Censorial Anti-TikTok EO–Marland v. [read post]
19 May 2010, 4:37 am
Police officer to receive full §207-c while simultaneously receiving SSDI benefitsMatter of McCaffrey v Town of E. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
"On April 11, 2022, petitioner submitted a FOIL request to the Office of Court Administration (OCA). [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 6:00 am
"On April 11, 2022, petitioner submitted a FOIL request to the Office of Court Administration (OCA). [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 7:00 am
Citing Matter of Baloy v Kelly, 92 AD3d 521, the Appellate Division opined that the possibility of Officer obtaining administrative relief was exhausted when Officer retired without a change in his modified status. [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 7:00 am
Citing Matter of Baloy v Kelly, 92 AD3d 521, the Appellate Division opined that the possibility of Officer obtaining administrative relief was exhausted when Officer retired without a change in his modified status. [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 7:00 am
Citing Matter of Baloy v Kelly, 92 AD3d 521, the Appellate Division opined that the possibility of Officer obtaining administrative relief was exhausted when Officer retired without a change in his modified status. [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 7:00 am
Citing Matter of Baloy v Kelly, 92 AD3d 521, the Appellate Division opined that the possibility of Officer obtaining administrative relief was exhausted when Officer retired without a change in his modified status. [read post]
15 May 2023, 5:30 am
Section V reviews an anti-bribery statute enacted by the first Congress. [read post]
27 Dec 2023, 2:09 pm
In Segway Inc. v. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
It is the duty of the administrative tribunal, not the reviewing court, to weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses and determine which testimony to accept and which to reject. 3. [read post]
7 Nov 2018, 4:00 am
It is the duty of the administrative tribunal, not the reviewing court, to weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses and determine which testimony to accept and which to reject. 3. [read post]
23 Jun 2021, 12:00 am
In United States v. [read post]
15 May 2017, 8:00 am
"Although the court observed that "[A] determination made by an administrative agency must first be challenged through every available administrative remedy before it can be raised in a court of law," it said that this rule does not apply where [1] "an administrative challenge would be futile" or [2] where "the issue to be determined is purely a question of law. [read post]
22 Apr 2008, 8:00 am
On appeal, Combs contended that (1) the court's failure to apply the "administrative/production worker dichotomy" pertaining to the administrative exemption from overtime compensation, which was announced in Bell v. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 12:15 pm
"In this instance the court found that the Town Board's determination that Kaufman was guilty of the specified acts of misconduct was supported by substantial evidence.In addition, said the court, "[a]n administrative penalty must be upheld unless it is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness,' thus constituting an abuse of discretion as a matter of law," citing Kreisler v New York City Transit… [read post]
26 Aug 2015, 7:20 am
This merits claim was grounded in principles announced by the Supreme Court in its Free Enterprise opinion and the outcome in that court’s Freytag opinion, which found that special tax court judges were inferior officers. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 8:33 am
The appellant denied the charge and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Law and an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) for an evidentiary hearing. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 8:33 am
The appellant denied the charge and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Law and an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) for an evidentiary hearing. [read post]
