Search for: "S. et al v. New York City Department Of Education," Results 61 - 80 of 104
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Jan 2019, 9:01 pm by Public Employment Law Press
This amendment set out New YorkState's response to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448.In Janus the high court held that states and public-sector unions may no longer require "nonconsenting employees" in a collective bargaining unit to pay an "agency shop fee" in lieu of becoming a member the certified or… [read post]
1 Jan 2019, 9:01 pm by Public Employment Law Press
This amendment set out New YorkState's response to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Janus v American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, et al, 138 SCt 2448.In Janus the high court held that states and public-sector unions may no longer require "nonconsenting employees" in a collective bargaining unit to pay an "agency shop fee" in lieu of becoming a member the certified or… [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 10:46 am by David Greene
”8 These tactics were largely effective: because of the lawsuits, the New York Times pulled its Alabama reporter for several years, sharply limiting its original reporting on events there.9 Both NYT v Sullivan and Abernathy et al. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2021, 9:15 am by Richard Hunt
On December 6 the Department of Justice entered a Consent Decree in Self, Inc. et al v. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 12:41 pm by Erin Miller
Brief in opposition of respondents California Pharmacists Association et al. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 2:31 pm by Jeff Welty
The Commission appears to have based its finding on promising early experiences in a handful of large departments, including Oakland, New York City, and Kansas City. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 3:25 pm by Christa Culver
" Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (10th Circuit)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionRespondents' supplemental briefPetitioner's supplemental briefAmicus brief of the National Congress of American IndiansPetitioner's replyCVSG Information:Invited: February 22, 2011Filed: May 27, 2011 (Deny) Title: City of New York v. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 8:00 am
This author finds this particular issue timely in light of the developing lawsuit against the famed New York City firm of Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP. [19]. [read post]
5 Dec 2011, 7:14 am by Lyle Denniston
New York City Board of Education (11-386). [read post]