Search for: "US v. Taylor"
Results 1101 - 1120
of 2,463
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Nov 2018, 7:12 am
” Taylor v. [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 7:12 am
” Taylor v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
Commentary on Monday’s opinion in DIRECTV v. [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]
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]
7 Dec 2016, 1:45 pm
That’s the language the court used in dicta in Taylor, and it comports with the manner in which Chapter 15A permits misdemeanor offenses to be charged. [read post]
7 Dec 2016, 1:45 pm
That’s the language the court used in dicta in Taylor, and it comports with the manner in which Chapter 15A permits misdemeanor offenses to be charged. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 11:15 am
Indeed, the colloquial "water torture" references in U.S. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2007, 12:29 am
Taylor U.S. [read post]
11 Sep 2011, 8:49 am
In Ingraham v. [read post]
19 Jul 2011, 7:00 am
In Gutierrez v. [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 6:47 am
United States, 16-8777, Taylor v. [read post]
5 Oct 2020, 3:20 am
Omaha Steaks International, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 3:10 pm
See Rogers v. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 3:10 pm
See Rogers v. [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 3:13 pm
There is also a Mini-Trial to use the case as a teaching tool in secondary school. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 9:11 am
I guess we'll see.]Pamela Shareka Langham v. [read post]
26 Jan 2014, 7:28 am
United States v. [read post]
