Search for: "3 NY3d 1"
Results 121 - 140
of 663
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
Petitioner asked Supreme Court to (1) annulling the Employer’s terminating him from his position, (2) directing his reinstatement to his position with back pay, benefits, service time, seniority and other fringe benefits; and (3) award him the costs and disbursements of this proceeding, together with reasonable attorney's fees. [read post]
13 Mar 2015, 6:28 am
Fam Ct Act art 3. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 9:12 am
[Long Beach Unit], 8 NY3d 465Article V, Section 6 of New York State’s Constitution mandates that appointments and promotions in the civil service of the State and its political subdivisions "shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 7:00 am
Relations Bd., 95 AD3d 1479, 1484 [2012] [internal quotation marks, ellipsis and citations omitted], affd 21 NY3d 255 [2013]). [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 7:00 am
Relations Bd., 95 AD3d 1479, 1484 [2012] [internal quotation marks, ellipsis and citations omitted], affd 21 NY3d 255 [2013]). [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 6:49 am
City, 1 NY3d 280, 290; Calderon v Walgreen Co., 72 AD3d 1532, appeal dismissed 15 NY3d 900). [read post]
23 Oct 2024, 6:00 am
Servs., 3 NY3d 498, 505 [2004]; see also Matter of New York State Off. of Children & Family Serv [read post]
23 Oct 2024, 6:00 am
Servs., 3 NY3d 498, 505 [2004]; see also Matter of New York State Off. of Children & Family Serv [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 4:36 am
., 5 NY3d 11, 19 [2005]). [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 3:51 am
Caruso, 68 AD3d 1 , 6 (lst Dept 2009), aff’d 14 NY3d 874 (2010). [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
New York StatePublic Employment Relations Board, et al., 19 NY3d 876. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 4:00 am
"Article 75 of the CPLR provides that an arbitration award may be vacated if the court finds that the rights of a party were prejudiced by (1) corruption, fraud, or misconduct in procuring the award; (2) partiality of an arbitrator; (3) the arbitrator exceeded his or her power; or (4) the arbitrator failed to follow the procedures mandated by Article 75. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 6:00 am
In this instance the Appellate Division found: 1. [read post]
8 Sep 2021, 4:00 am
In deciding this action brought by an individual [Plaintiff] alleging he had been defamed by a public officer, the Appellate Division observed that the elements of a cause of action to recover damages for defamation are the making of [1] a false statement that tends to expose a person to public contempt, hatred, ridicule, aversion, or disgrace; [2] published without privilege or authorization to a third party; [3] amounting to fault as judged by, at a minimum, a negligence… [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 4:00 am
New York StatePublic Employment Relations Board, et al., 19 NY3d 876. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 4:00 am
"Article 75 of the CPLR provides that an arbitration award may be vacated if the court finds that the rights of a party were prejudiced by (1) corruption, fraud, or misconduct in procuring the award; (2) partiality of an arbitrator; (3) the arbitrator exceeded his or her power; or (4) the arbitrator failed to follow the procedures mandated by Article 75. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 7:00 am
Rejecting Plaintiff's assertion that Supreme Court had jurisdiction over Queensborough Community College, where Plaintiff was employed, because it is a community college rather than a senior college, the Appellate Division explained: 1. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 6:30 am
" However, explained the court, "Whether a particular statement constitutes an opinion or objective fact is a question of law," [see Mann v Abel, 10 NY3d at 276]. [read post]
23 Sep 2024, 6:00 am
"* See Matter of Barella v State of New York Off. of Mental Health, 175 AD3d 495, citing Wien & Malkin LLP v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 6 NY3d 471. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 7:00 am
Rejecting Plaintiff's assertion that Supreme Court had jurisdiction over Queensborough Community College, where Plaintiff was employed, because it is a community college rather than a senior college, the Appellate Division explained: 1. [read post]