Search for: "State v. C. Kelly" Results 81 - 100 of 549
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In contrast, in Atkinson v Kelly[8]the decision reports that then serving appointing authority "authorized" Atkinson's supervisor to resolve a disciplinary issue by obtaining  a letter of resignation from Atkinson. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In contrast, in Atkinson v Kelly[8]the decision reports that then serving appointing authority "authorized" Atkinson's supervisor to resolve a disciplinary issue by obtaining  a letter of resignation from Atkinson. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
In contrast, in Atkinson v Kelly[8]the decision reports that then serving appointing authority "authorized" Atkinson's supervisor to resolve a disciplinary issue by obtaining  a letter of resignation from Atkinson. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 3:04 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Co., 21 NY3d 324, 334 [2013], quoting AG Capital Funding Partners, L.P. v State St. [read post]
25 May 2021, 2:55 am by Colby Pastre
States were never intended to tax international income, and doing so raises serious constitutional issues in many states. [read post]
20 Jan 2021, 8:49 am by Arnold Wadsworth Coggins
    ¶8 Second, as an alternative ground for dismissal, the court determined Utah Code section 30-3-10.4(1)(c)4 “means what it says” regarding the use of dispute resolution procedures to resolve disputes related to the modification of custody. [read post]
16 Jan 2021, 10:57 pm by Mahmoud Khatib
This includes courts in California, Delaware, Illinois, New York, and Washington.[26] To determine which category a letter of intent falls under, courts examine the intentions of the parties.[27] In fact, the primary factor of all letter of intent analysis is the intentions of the parties.[28] Intent is the “touchstone” upon which letter of intent litigation hinges.[29] C. [read post]
The district court dismissed these claims stating that the alleged taking had not sought compensation in the earlier state court proceedings as required by Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. [read post]