Search for: "Taylor v. I. N. S"
Results 141 - 160
of 355
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Aug 2016, 10:28 am
I, for one, can’t wait. [read post]
25 Aug 2016, 10:28 am
I, for one, can’t wait. [read post]
14 May 2016, 3:00 am
”Taylor v City of New York 2016 NY Slip Op 03454 Decided on May 3, 2016 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. [read post]
25 May 2020, 6:30 am
The other is that Texas v. [read post]
19 Jan 2023, 8:30 am
Taylor, 2022-NCCOA-910, ___ N.C. [read post]
12 Mar 2017, 8:53 pm
United States v. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 6:44 am
However the rule is substantially similar to the federal rule, and so here's the Ninth Circuit's take on the issue (from Taylor v. [read post]
10 Dec 2020, 7:44 am
I. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 8:10 am
Corp. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 11:58 am
” Taylor 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]
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]
14 Jul 2009, 6:37 am
He's a veteran of such battles as Hexion v. [read post]
20 May 2022, 11:43 pm
I certainly did not have a contract of employment, and to the best of my knowledge I still did not have one when I left the Clerk’s Department in 2006 – or, at any rate, I was never shown one or asked to sign one. [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 9:13 am
See Taylor v. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 9:00 pm
Taylor v. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 5:08 am
State v. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 12:20 pm
Taylor Jr. and ex-death row inmate Kirk N. [read post]
