Search for: "Brown v. Superintendent"
Results 1 - 20
of 66
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 May 2014, 2:12 pm
These he [the superintendent] stated warranted separation. [read post]
13 Nov 2007, 8:31 am
Ritchie v. [read post]
5 Jul 2007, 9:06 am
Uttecht, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary v. [read post]
28 Oct 2013, 2:47 pm
In the case of Brown v Texas, the People's burden of proof as to the programmatic purpose is derived from the constitutional principle underlying the reasonableness of a suspicionless roadblock stop, i.e., a weighing of the gravity of the public concerns served by the seizure, the degree to which the seizure advances the public interest, and the severity of the interference with individual liberty. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 7:32 am
The New Old Test In Browning Ferris, the Board returned to the test the Board applied to joint employer cases before 1984 and as was articulated by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in another case ironically involving Browning Ferris, NLRB v. [read post]
21 Mar 2009, 11:16 am
In Fred Brown v. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 6:53 am
Brown, J.D. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 3:35 am
*Jim Brown, a teacher, sued James Simmons, the superintendent of the Conway (Arkansas) Public School District, alleging that Simmons infringed Brown’s procedural due process rights by denying him a name-clearing hearing. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 2:14 am
Starting today in the Supreme Court is the appeal of Ministry of Defence v AB & Ors, which will be heard by Lady Hale and Lords Phillips, Walker, Brown, Mance, Kerr and Wilson over three and a half days. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 10:08 am
Schuk v. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 2:31 pm
People v Scott, Michigan Dept of State Police v Sitz, Indianapolis v Edmond, People v Jackson and People v Trotter settled that a roadblock or checkpoint stop is a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 3:15 am
”The Court of Appeals cited Gavigan v McCoy, 37 NY2d 548, Niebling v Wagner, 12 NY2d 314, and Mandle v Brown, 4 AD2d 283, affirmed 5 NY2d 51, as cases demonstrating the proposition that an employee cannot achieve a higher grade or salary by being assigned or engaging in out-of-title work “because this would violate the fundamental civil service tenet of advancement through competitive examination. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 4:30 am
"The Court of Appeals cited Gavigan v McCoy, 37 NY2d 548, Niebling v Wagner, 12 NY2d 314, and Mandle v Brown, 4 AD2d 283, affirmed 5 NY2d 51, as cases demonstrating the proposition that an employee cannot achieve a higher grade or salary by being assigned or engaging in out-of-title work "because this would violate the fundamental civil service tenet of advancement through competitive examination. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 8:40 am
KOWALSKI v. [read post]
8 Sep 2007, 8:41 am
First we had Brown v. board of education being overruled and now we have this incident in the USA. [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 7:17 am
Brown, J.D. [read post]
26 Feb 2015, 6:30 am
Supreme Court ruling Brown v. [read post]
12 Mar 2018, 10:15 am
As the Supreme Court observed in Brown v. [read post]
4 Sep 2016, 8:54 am
LEXIS 115217 (ND NY, Aug. 29, 2016) a New York federal district court allowed a Muslim inmate to move ahead against the prison superintendent with his complaint that he was denied the cold alternative diet and was told it was only available to Jewish inmates.In Lindh v. [read post]
30 Oct 2015, 4:00 am
”Turning to DOE’s termination of Teacher’s employment, the Appellate Division, citing Brown v City of New York, 280 AD2d 368, observed that it is well established that a "probationary employee may be discharged for any or no reason at all in the absence of a showing that [the] dismissal was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in violation of law. [read post]
