Search for: "State v. N. N."
Results 8001 - 8020
of 21,439
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2017, 2:56 pm
Rev. 539, 547 (2003); see also Oatway v. [read post]
18 Mar 2010, 12:43 am
"Finding that under the Public Authorities Law §2(1) and (2)(a), a "public benefit corporation" such as ECMCC is included under the definitions for both a "state authority" and a "local authority," the Appellate Division ruled that ECMCC is an "authority" within the meaning of both the Public Authorities Law and the County Rules, thus constituting a separate layoff unit within the County.Holding that "[A]n arbitral award that… [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 11:08 am
” See p.43 n.38 (quoting Robinson v. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 1:15 pm
In Losner v. [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 8:25 am
The 1989 model form states, “[N]o assignment or other disposition of interest by a party shall relieve such party of obligations previously incurred by such party. [read post]
29 Jul 2015, 1:15 pm
” Citing to George v. [read post]
9 Oct 2024, 2:29 am
Robert N. [read post]
9 Oct 2024, 2:29 am
Robert N. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 12:29 pm
State v. [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 10:24 am
The case of the day is Constellation Energy Commodities Group Inc. v. [read post]
5 May 2014, 5:45 pm
California and United States v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 1:47 am
In Smith v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 1:47 am
In Smith v. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
Civil Service Employees Ass'n, 8 N.Y.3d 513, “Once such an informed decision as to which positions are to be [abolished] is made, §80(1) obligates the employer to respect the seniority rights of its employees. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
Civil Service Employees Ass'n, 8 N.Y.3d 513, “Once such an informed decision as to which positions are to be [abolished] is made, §80(1) obligates the employer to respect the seniority rights of its employees. [read post]
8 Jan 2021, 4:00 am
* Article V, §7 of the New York Constitution, which states that "Membership in any pension or retirement system of the state or of a civil division thereof shall be a contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired". [read post]
22 May 2016, 10:03 am
United States v. [read post]
27 Jun 2015, 7:27 pm
Judge Fletcher explains why.United States v. [read post]
13 Aug 2024, 10:00 am
See Bailey v. [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
Seniority for the purposes of layoff and reinstatement from a preferred list set out in "settlement agreement"Giardina v New York City Health and Hosp. [read post]
