Search for: "Rochester v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 436
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]
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]
19 Apr 2020, 4:12 pm
Rothman, Loyola Law School, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles; Yale Information Society Project, Yale Law School The Inconsentability of Facial Surveillance, 66 Loyola Law Review 101 (2019), Evan Selinger, Rochester Institute of Technology – Department of Philosophy, Woodrow Hartzog, Northeastern University School of Law and Khoury Colle [read post]
16 Mar 2020, 9:12 am
See United States v. [read post]
23 Feb 2020, 9:01 pm
Once again, a Justice Dollinger opinion, here in Messsinger v. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 3:08 am
The case is Health Care & Retirement Corp. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2020, 3:03 am
[Federalist Society SCOTUS Brief video with Jay Schweikert on Ramos v. [read post]
27 Nov 2019, 2:00 am
The NPR story notes that Syed, who was 17 years old at the time of the murder, intends to litigate a Miller v. [read post]
8 Nov 2019, 12:19 pm
United States Automobile Association, No. [read post]
1 Nov 2019, 6:49 am
One plaintiff worked at the courthouse in Rochester. [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 12:45 pm
United States Automobile Association, No. [read post]
10 Sep 2019, 4:41 pm
Butt v Secretary of State for Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 933 Serafin v Malkiewicz & Ors([2019] EWCA Civ 852) The defendant was successful in the first three cases and the claimant in third The Supreme Court heard two libel cases: Lachaux v Independent Print [2019] UKSC 27 and Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17. [read post]
6 Sep 2019, 4:00 am
The Council of the City of Rochester (Council) adopted Local Law No. 4 of 2019 [Local Law] to amend the City Charter. [read post]
23 Aug 2019, 2:58 am
Fitzgerald, Finger Lakes Times] “Finkelstein has gone on a lawsuit-filing spree since getting his law license back in New York state in 2016,” and among his 50 ADA suits are some the named plaintiff says he didn’t know about [Julia Marsh, New York Post] In EEOC-land no one can hear you honk [press release on EEOC lawsuit against limo service that declined to hire deaf driver] “Washington Supreme Court Says Obesity Is a Disability” [Ben McDonald, and thanks… [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 7:38 am
For example, the United States Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether law enforcement could obtain historical cell phone records last year in Carpenter v. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 7:35 am
People v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 4:22 pm
., v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 4:22 pm
., v. [read post]
