Search for: "City of New York, Appeal of" Results 121 - 140 of 10,783
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Jun 2014, 1:42 pm by William Hibbitts
[JURIST] The New York Court of Appeals [official website] ruled [opinion, PDF] 4-2 Thursday that the New York City Board of Health [official website] exceeded its powers as a regulatory authority by banning the serving of large portions of sugary drinks. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 6:05 am by Erin McCarthy Holliday
A New York appeals judge ruled Friday that a New York City ban on flavored tobacco liquid products, enacted via emergency regulation, was an overstep of its authority. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 6:36 am by Legal Profession Prof
The New York Court of Appeals has held favorably to an attorney in a case that presented this issue This appeal concerns the appropriate treatment of statutory counsel fees awarded under the New York City Human Rights Law where the... [read post]
3 Oct 2018, 9:22 am by Phillips & Associates
More Blog Posts: Class Actions Allege Criminal History Discrimination Under New York City, Federal Laws, New York Employment Attorney Blog, February 9, 2018 Discrimination Based on a New York Job Applicant’s Criminal History May Be Illegal, New York Employment Attorney Blog, December 12, 2017 New York Court of Appeals Clarifies Criminal History Discrimination Under State Law,… [read post]
30 Apr 2008, 2:53 pm
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on Wednesday dismissed [opinion, PDF] a lawsuit filed by the city of New York against gun manufacturers, ruling that gun makers were immune from suit under a 2005 federal law [JURIST report] that shields the firearms industry from civil lawsuits brought by cities, municipalities and victims of gun crimes. [read post]
21 Feb 2010, 5:34 pm by Matthew Lerner
Last week, the New York Times featured this article on Chief Judge Lippman's impact on the New York Court of Appeals. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 8:34 am by Kevin Sheerin
This is a short video about the New York City Civil Service Law Section 61, known as the 1 in 3 rule. [read post]
18 Jun 2021, 10:57 am by Kevin Sheerin
New York City Personnel Services Bulletin 100-10R addresses the process of appealing a civil service job disqualification. [read post]
6 Jul 2007, 8:13 am
It's time for the (belated) weekly round up of interesting New York legal news headlines--live from Salt Lake Lake City, Utah: Appeals Panel Splits Three Ways on Church-State Suit (NY Sun) Judge... [read post]
23 Mar 2021, 12:04 pm by Kevin Sheerin
New York City Personnel Services Bulletin 100-10R addresses the process of appealing a civil service job disqualification: New York State Civil Service Law and the New York City Charter authorized the DCAS Commissioner to disqualify a candidate for medical or psychological reasons. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 6:51 am by Kevin Sheerin
New York City Personnel Services Bulletin 100-10R addresses the process of appealing a civil service job disqualification: New York State Civil Service Law and the New York City Charter authorized the DCAS Commissioner to disqualify a candidate for medical or psychological reasons. [read post]
20 May 2021, 9:37 am by Kevin Sheerin
New York City Personnel Services Bulletin 100-10R addresses the process of appealing a civil service job disqualification: New York State Civil Service Law and the New York City Charter authorized the DCAS Commissioner to disqualify a candidate for medical or psychological reasons. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 12:27 pm by lennyesq
 The Court held that certain personnel records sought by the New York City Civil Liberties Union (“NYCLU”) pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law (“FOIL”) are exempt from disclosure under New York Civil Rights Law § 50-a and New York Public Officers Law § 87(2)(a). [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 1:36 pm by Kelly Lamendola
Parkes, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a constitutional challenge of New York City’s political contribution limits on “lobbyists” and others having business dealings with the City (a/k/a the “pay-to-play” rules), finding that such limits do not violate First Amendment free speech rights. [read post]