Search for: "US v. Kelly" Results 161 - 180 of 1,979
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2008, 12:41 am
Although the Appellate Division noted that Garnes "was terminable without a hearing and without a statement of the reason for his dismissal," the court, citing York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760 and Matter of Johnson v Kelly, 35 AD3d 297, said the Garnes failed to demonstrate that his termination was in bad faith, unlawful, or for an impermissible reason. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 3:34 am
Agency’s use of its non-punitive procedure not a prerequisite to disciplinary actionMatter of Van Osten v Horn, 37 AD3d 317The Commissioner of the New York City Department of Corrections terminated correction officer Michele Van Osten’s employment after finding her guilty of disciplinary charges that her absences from work were excessive and inadequately explained, and that she was unable to perform the full range of her duties as a corrections officer. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 8:13 am by Amy Howe
Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this post ran on September 23, 2019, as an introduction to this blog’s symposium on Kelly v. [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 5:35 am by Kelly Nuckolls
Eric joined Visiting Assistant Professor Kelly Nuckolls to discuss with the class possible upcoming changes to the CWA's "Waters of the United States" definition by both the Supreme Court (Sackett v. [read post]
4 Jun 2013, 8:04 am by Matthew David Brozik
Consider, for example, the May 31 decision in the Second Circuit matter of Kelly-Brown, et al. v. [read post]
11 Mar 2015, 2:54 am
This case is Kelly-Brown v Winfrey, No. 11 cv 7875 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
28 Nov 2023, 12:36 pm by blaw.firm.admin
That trial court’s interpretation of “willful misconduct” in the context of the pleading stage was based on Kelly v. [read post]
23 May 2008, 7:46 am
Niki Kelly reports today on yesterday's oral arguments before the Supreme Court in the case of Debra Barnett v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 4:40 pm by Colin O'Keefe
Supreme Court Sides with Vaccine Manufacturers in Bruesewitz v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 11:33 am by Peter Groves
The Trade Union Congress was influential in getting them included in the Act, and my friend Lord Lloyd of Kilgerran took the leading role (I think) in piloting them through Parliament, but they hardly ever deliver for the employee-inventor (Kelly and Chiu v GE Healthcare [2009] EWHC 181 (Pat) being the single swallow that could not make a summer). [read post]
The 2018 convictions were called for reconsideration following the 2020 US Supreme Court decision in Kelly v. [read post]