Search for: "Doe v. Coughlin"
Results 61 - 80
of 106
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Sep 2014, 10:41 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [read post]
6 Sep 2014, 8:51 am
The style of the case is Hamilton Properties v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 10:42 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [read post]
2 Sep 2014, 10:45 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [read post]
1 Sep 2014, 10:52 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 10:46 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [read post]
30 Aug 2014, 10:42 pm
In Matter of Stralem,it was held that while the following is extremely unlikely to ever occur, it does present a scenario where a legal fee adjustment would be mandated. [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]
22 Apr 2014, 7:41 am
In Eisai Co. v. [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]
7 Sep 2013, 7:29 pm
A sizeable estate permits adequate compensation, but nothing beyond that (Martin v Phipps). [read post]
20 May 2013, 4:41 am
" In contrast, the Appellate Division, citing Rychlick v Coughlin, 99 AD2d 863, affd. 63 NY2d 643, explained that "it has consistently been held that a threat to do that which one has the legal right to do does not constitute duress. [read post]
19 Dec 2012, 4:08 pm
Benfer, Christine Nero Coughlin, Dea C. [read post]
2 Oct 2012, 6:00 am
In Fields v. [read post]
2 Oct 2012, 6:00 am
In Fields v. [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 8:50 pm
Charging Excessive Fees In Coughlin v. [read post]
23 Aug 2012, 3:00 am
” NYPPL Comment: On the issue of coercion in connection with an appointing authority’s threatening disciplinary action if the employee does not resign from his or her position, the Court of Appeals has held that threatening to do what the appointing authority had a right to do -- i.e., file disciplinary charges -- did not constitute coercion so as to make the resignation involuntary [Rychlick v Coughlin, 63 NY2d 643]. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 12:42 pm
ASB Allegiance Real Estate Fund v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 12:40 pm
Coughlin v. [read post]
3 Jul 2012, 8:53 pm
Pinnacle v. [read post]
