Search for: "Call v. State" Results 981 - 1000 of 55,347
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Apr 2007, 9:33 am
"Justice Castille's thin-skinned protest will stir state Supreme Court critics": This editorial appears today in The Allentown Morning Call. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 9:50 am by Public Employment Law Press
New York State Civil Service Rule 4 NYCRR 5.3(d), since repealed, permitted the appointing authority of a State department or agency employee to terminate a tenured employee in the Classified Service absent for a period of ten or more days without an explanation by deeming the employee to have resigned from his or her position. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 9:50 am by Public Employment Law Press
New York State Civil Service Rule 4 NYCRR 5.3(d), since repealed, permitted the appointing authority of a State department or agency employee to terminate a tenured employee in the Classified Service absent for a period of ten or more days without an explanation by deeming the employee to have resigned from his or her position. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 10:57 am
June 25, 2015 On June 18, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of King, et al. v. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 6:25 pm
One of the landmark cases in product liability, Liebeck v. [read post]
30 Jul 2016, 5:21 pm by Bridget Crawford
Our symposium will focus on developing issues in criminal procedure arising from the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Utah v. [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 8:09 am by Rick St. Hilaire
Photo: Giovani V; CC.CONTACT: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com ©2010-2011 Ricardo A. [read post]
Significantly, the Court stated that while “an on-call guard must return to duty if called to do so, [] remaining available to work is not the same as actually working. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 6:48 pm by Steve Vladeck
Three weeks ago, CAAF granted review in United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 4:00 am by Canadian Association of Law Libraries
Changes to the makeup of the United States Supreme Court fuel the continued anticipation of a Roe v Wade reversal. [read post]
11 Jul 2013, 1:27 pm by WIMS
      The Appeals Court said, "Having reviewed the dismissal de novo, assuming that the facts stated in the complaint are true, Lambeth v. [read post]