Search for: "McManus v. McManus" Results 101 - 120 of 124
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Feb 2011, 4:59 am
Continuation on the payroll for a brief period after the expiration of a probationary period does not automatically result in the individual attaining tenure by estoppel [Mendez v Valenti, 101 AD2d 612]. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 3:20 am
Quoting from McManus v Grippen, 244 AD2d 632, the court said “it was incumbent upon [the defendant] to come forward with admissible evidence showing that plaintiff [‘s] political affiliations and activities did not play a substantial part in its decision. [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 3:59 am
Attaining tenure by estoppelLilley v Mills, App. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 8:33 pm by pete.black@gmail.com (Peter Black)
"James Franco Shows Three Shorts in Palm Springs, Explains Career Plan" http://j.mp/dheaow copyrights & campaigns blog on "Viacom v. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 5:15 am by David Smith
In Chohan v McManus [2008] EWCA Civ 1657 the Court of Appeal was considering what constituted occupation of premises for the purposes of an Assured Tenancy. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 5:15 am by David Smith
In Chohan v McManus [2008] EWCA Civ 1657 the Court of Appeal was considering what constituted occupation of premises for the purposes of an Assured Tenancy. [read post]
19 Nov 2009, 12:40 am
Certain Underwriters NEW YORK COUNTY Evidence No 'New' Information Contained in Plaintiff's Bill Of Particulars; Defendant Denied Its Preclusion McManus v. [read post]
9 Sep 2009, 11:18 pm
  Ian Boyko, Canadian Federation of Students Expand fair dealing in line with the case of CHH v. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 2:14 am
  Ian Boyko, Canadian Federation of Students Expand fair dealing in line with the case of CHH v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 7:03 am
Ltd v Parle Agro Pvt. [read post]
22 Jun 2008, 1:10 pm
(Court Reporter Paul McManus, OCR.)THIS IS A TEXT ONLY ENTRY. [read post]
28 Jun 2007, 7:07 am
Bryan Corbin of the Evansville Courier & Press reports today on yesterday's 3-2 Supreme Court decision in State of Indiana v. [read post]