Search for: "Case v. Taylor"
Results 661 - 680
of 3,591
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
5 May 2020, 5:03 am
Thus, this is not a case like Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. [read post]
2 May 2020, 8:39 am
House of Representatives v. [read post]
1 May 2020, 12:32 pm
See, e.g., United States 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]
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]
30 Apr 2020, 9:53 am
House of Representatives v. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 10:14 am
She argued, and won, Buck v. [read post]
27 Apr 2020, 8:56 am
An example, in the case of Taylor v. [read post]
25 Apr 2020, 6:54 pm
Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947). [read post]
25 Apr 2020, 6:54 pm
Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 (1947). [read post]
25 Apr 2020, 5:33 am
Every student of national security law knows about Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 3:55 pm
In Bashin v. [read post]
18 Apr 2020, 8:48 am
Cook v. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 1:03 pm
The Case Law Taylor Made Software Inc. v. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 8:23 am
John-Taylor Properties, LLC, 2020 WL 1678251 (S.D. [read post]
8 Apr 2020, 7:34 am
’” Opeta v. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 11:39 am
(forthcoming) In the consolidated cases Altitude Express v. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 10:16 am
Here is the abstract.In the consolidated cases Altitude Express v. [read post]