Search for: "Disciplinary Counsel v. York"
Results 61 - 80
of 424
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Jan 2015, 8:03 am
Co. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Josh Liebman of counsel), for The New York City Department of Education, respondent. [read post]
17 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Josh Liebman of counsel), for The New York City Department of Education, respondent. [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 6:13 pm
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
25 Nov 2015, 4:00 am
The employee’s counsel, on the other hand, described the pre-trial meeting as consisting of a five-minute conversation in which counsel informed the witnesses about why they were present and asked them to simply testify as to what they remembered about the incident. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 4:00 am
The Appellate Division affirmed Supreme Court’s ruling, explaining that judicial review of and authority to vacate a hearing officer's determination of disciplinary charges against a tenured teacher is limited to the grounds set forth in CPLR 7511(b)(1), including acts in excess of the arbitrator's power [and citing City School District of New York v McGraham, 17 NY3d 917] [w]here, as here, parties are subject to compulsory arbitration, the award must… [read post]
13 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Geoffrey E. [read post]
13 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Hinds-Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Geoffrey E. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 9:30 am
During the course of the disciplinary hearing, Attorney applied for and accepted a position as executive deputy counsel with NYCDOE, whereupon Attorney recused herself from representing Principal in the then ongoing §3020-a disciplinary action. [read post]
29 Apr 2020, 9:30 am
During the course of the disciplinary hearing, Attorney applied for and accepted a position as executive deputy counsel with NYCDOE, whereupon Attorney recused herself from representing Principal in the then ongoing §3020-a disciplinary action. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 6:56 am
Office of Disciplinary Counsel. [read post]
28 Jan 2022, 12:26 pm
Pre-pandemic challenge to New York’s vaccine regime F.F., as parent of Y.F., v. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
(It summarily disregarded his “due process” assertions, given that R.C. had notice of the charges, was represented by counsel, appeared at the hearing, the record contained a certified transcript of the hearing, and the hearing officer only used records that were formally entered into evidence.)Looks like R.C. couldn’t cop it sweet there ….# # #DECISIONMatter of C. v Shea [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 3:29 am
After the Supreme Court’s decision two months ago in Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
31 Jan 2011, 4:05 am
Accordingly, said the court, the hearing officer’s decision to go forward with the disciplinary hearing in Toolasprashad's absence was arbitrary and capricious.The Mari decision [Mari v Safir, 291 AD2d 298, motion for leave to appeal denied, 98 NY2d 613] sets out the general standards applied by the courts in resolving litigation resulting from conducting a disciplinary hearing in absentia.The decision demonstrates that an individual against whom… [read post]
10 Jun 2019, 4:00 am
Vale and Linda Fang of counsel), for respondent.DECISION & JUDGMENTProceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of David Molik, Director of the Administrative Hearings Unit of The New York Justice Center for the Protection of People with Special Needs dated August 5, 2016. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 3:57 am
Termination following discipline hearing conducted in absentia upheldChawki v New York City Department of Education, Manhattan High Schools, District 71, 39 AD3d 321The New York City Department of Education (DOE) served disciplinary charges and specifications on Houda Chawki, a tenured high school teacher. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 3:00 am
He had also presided over disciplinary hearings as a Deputy Trials Commissioner. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 4:15 am
The Appellate Division rejected Respondent's "factual parsing of the incident" and concluded that the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel precluded the ALJ from deciding again whether Petitioner's conduct amounted to physical abuse of the service recipient.Citing D'Arata v New York Cent. [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 3:39 am
" ** See Dobrin v. [read post]
