Search for: "Taylor v. Social Security"
Results 101 - 120
of 251
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Oct 2017, 4:16 pm
The trial in the case of Mark Lewis Law Ltd & Anor v Taylor Hampton Solicitors Ltd & Anor will begin in the High Court this week. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 6:00 am
This paper first considers the facts of R v Taylor and discusses the decisions of the trial court, the Alberta Court of Appeal, and the SCC. [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]
28 Jun 2014, 6:55 am
Security Council. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 5:00 pm
App. 1994), the plaintiff tried to bring a negligence per se action for the violation of another federal statute (Title XIX of the federal Social Security Act) that didn't allow private enforcement. [read post]
6 Jul 2018, 8:50 am
* Burke v. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 4:00 pm
Appx. 252, 258 (5th Cir. 2016); see also Taylor & Lieberman v. [read post]
6 Mar 2022, 4:02 pm
Media Law in Other Jurisdictions Australia On 28 February 2022, the claimant’s case was dismissed in Taylor v Nationwide News Pty Limited (No 2) [2022] FCA 149. [read post]
17 Feb 2024, 6:30 am
Modern originalists are leapfrogging over the Taft era to resurrect an older, anti-Federalist tradition of strict construction and textualism that dates back to Spencer Roane and John Taylor’s response to McCulloch v. [read post]
19 Feb 2017, 4:02 pm
Statements in Open Court On 14 February 2017 there was a statement in open court in the case of Taylor v Northamptonshire County Council. [read post]
16 Dec 2018, 4:04 pm
Surveillance PI comments on Taylor Swift’s alleged use of facial recognition software at a kiosk in a recent concert, which scanned users face’s without consent and compared them to those documented to pose a security risk to her. [read post]
11 Apr 2022, 5:07 am
Aleksandr V. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:19 am
The Privacy and Information Security Law Blog has more information here. [read post]
18 Dec 2010, 6:41 am
"Another element to consider: the impact the Taylor Law. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
In contrast, employees in a collective bargaining unit within the meaning of the Taylor Law,[13]regardless of their holding “permanent appointment” or otherwise, are typically entitled to many, if not all, the rights and benefits established through collective bargaining and set out in a collective bargaining agreement. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
In contrast, employees in a collective bargaining unit within the meaning of the Taylor Law,[13]regardless of their holding “permanent appointment” or otherwise, are typically entitled to many, if not all, the rights and benefits established through collective bargaining and set out in a collective bargaining agreement. [read post]
24 Jun 2018, 4:41 pm
The IAPP has considered Google’s new privacy and security features, which have been applied to Android devices. [read post]
