Search for: "Taylor v. U.S. Department of State"
Results 121 - 140
of 423
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
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]
2 May 2020, 8:39 am
House of Representatives v. [read post]
1 May 2020, 12:32 pm
See, e.g., United States 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]
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]
25 Apr 2020, 5:33 am
Early on April 26, Under Secretary of Commerce Wayne Chatfield Taylor accompanied a Justice Department attorney to visit Avery at Montgomery Ward’s Chicago offices. [read post]
16 Apr 2020, 1:03 pm
The Case Law Taylor Made Software Inc. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2020, 5:36 pm
Research and Resources China’s Approach on Data Privacy Law: A Third Way Between the U.S. and the EU? [read post]
14 Mar 2020, 8:02 am
Circuit ruling in Committee on the Judiciary v. [read post]
9 Feb 2020, 4:05 pm
Last Week in the Courts On 4 to 7 February 2020 Warby J heard the trial in the case of Sube v News Group Newspapers. [read post]
30 Jan 2020, 1:06 pm
In U.S. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2020, 1:59 pm
Benjamin Della Rocca and Richard Altieri explained both the newest trade deal between the U.S. and China and new regulations for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). [read post]
24 Dec 2019, 6:19 am
” (Frew v. [read post]
12 Dec 2019, 8:58 am
Taylor, 942 F.3d 205 (Nov. 5, 2019). [read post]
22 Nov 2019, 2:05 pm
“CIA-Backed Afghan Paramilitaries Behind Unlawful Killing Surge,” by Patricia Grossman for Just Security (Nov. 8, 2019): “Some U.S. officials have called for preserving the CIA’s parallel operations and these strike forces even after a U.S. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 5:08 am
State v. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 9:44 am
When asked by Chairman Adam Schiff him whether Burisma was included in the call package as a topic to discuss on the call with Zelensky, Morrison’s counsel instructed him not to answer the question, citing U.S. v. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 12:55 pm
Frank Taylor, the former undersecretary of homeland security for intelligence and analysis; Richard Stengel, the former undersecretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs; Matt Blaze, a professor of computer science and law at Georgetown University; and Ginny Badanes, the director for strategic projects in Microsoft's defending democracy program. [read post]
18 Nov 2019, 12:12 pm
As Lord Mansfield said in 1769, in the case of R. v. [read post]
