Search for: "Coughlin v. Coughlin"
Results 61 - 80
of 209
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2008, 6:00 am
Parker of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP. [read post]
1 Jun 2013, 9:00 pm
In Hinebaugh v. [read post]
18 Aug 2014, 4:00 am
In Rychlick v Coughlin, 63 NY2d 643, the employee was told that if he did not submit his resignation immediately he would be served with disciplinary charges. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
" * In Rychlick v Coughlin, 63 NY2d 643, the court said that the threat to file formal disciplinary charges if the employee did not resign does not constitute duress as it is not duress to threaten to do what one has the legal right to do.The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_01905.htm===================The Discipline Book, - a concise guide to disciplinary actions involving public employees in New York State. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 6:00 am
The District Court cited the Ninth Circuit decision Coughlin v. [read post]
9 Mar 2007, 4:46 pm
Daniels of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP, which is one of two law firms representing the City Council in the action. [read post]
10 Feb 2007, 11:11 am
AG Ontario (Labour Conventions) (1937) Winterhaven Stables v Canada (1989) Reference re Canada Assistance Plan (BC) (1991) Coughlin v Ontario Highway Transport Board (1968) [read post]
2 Jun 2016, 6:09 am
The style of the case is, Hamilton Properties v. [read post]
6 Mar 2008, 4:47 am
Curlin is very different from Coughlin, Conklin and Hamlin, as different as are the ordinary words 'poplin' and 'gremlin' noted by applicant. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 7:37 am
Coughlin, 344 F.3d 282, 291 (2d Cir. 2003). [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 4:00 am
As to the issue of a resignation being coerced from an employee or obtained under duress, the courts have concluded that where an appointing authority has the right, if not the duty, to take disciplinary action against an individual, "it was not duress to threaten to do what one had the legal right to do" [Rychlick v Coughlin, 63 NY2d 643].Rychlick, in the presence of a union representative, was told that unless he submitted his resignation formal disciplinary charges… [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 2:00 am
”* Concerning the issue obtaining an "involuntary resignation," in Rychlick v Coughlin, 63 NY2d 643, the Court of Appeals pointed out that threatening to do what the appointing authority had a right to do -- in this instance filing disciplinary charges against the employee if the employee did not submit his resignation from his position -- did not constitute coercion so as to make the resignation involuntary. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 4:07 am
”In affirming the lower court’s decision the Appellate Division observed that Supreme Court’s “findings of fact, based in large measure on its assessment of the credibility of the witnesses,” were supported by a fair interpretation of the record evidence.Addressing Buric allegations that “he was given two unpalatable choices,* or that he chose the service retirement due to financial considerations,” the Appellate Division said that neither constituted… [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 2:43 pm
Coughlin (Bankruptcy Act; Tribal Sovereign Immunity) Federal Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2022.html Kumar v. [read post]
21 Jun 2023, 1:15 pm
Coughlin (Tribal sovereign immunity from suit under the Bankruptcy Code) Federal Courts Bulletinhttps://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2023.html Unkechaug Indian Nation v. [read post]
16 Oct 2009, 8:11 am
Speakers include Jocelyn Larkin of the Impact Fund; Bonny Sweeny of Coughlin Stoia; Elizabeth Cabraser of Lieff Cabraser; Mark Chavez of Chavez & Gertler; and many others on both sides of the "v. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 6:48 am
Coughlin. [read post]
20 Aug 2020, 6:17 am
" In 1996, the Second Circuit held in Jolly v. [read post]
14 Sep 2017, 4:00 am
Further, in Graham v Coughlin, 72 NY2d 1014, the Court of Appeals upheld the removal of a state correction officer following his conviction of a felony under federal law. [read post]
5 Aug 2020, 4:00 am
Addressing yet another aspect of Appeal 1, the Appellate Division, citing Konigsberg v Coughlin, 68 NY2d 245, opined that "Contrary to [Plaintiff's] further contention in appeal No. 1, [Supreme Court] did not err in remitting the matter to [Respondents] to reconsider [Plaintiff's] request, provide a privilege log, and ultimately comply with its statutory obligations and thus any decision concerning Plaintiff's entitlement to attorney's fees are premature at… [read post]
