Search for: "Chandler v. Taylor*"
Results 1 - 20
of 29
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jun 2023, 12:34 pm
See Abernathy v. [read post]
29 Jun 2007, 2:16 pm
Co-authored by Adam Chandler. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 7:02 am
Read opinion here in Overdrive, Inc. v. [read post]
6 May 2022, 3:05 pm
, United States v. [read post]
3 Sep 2020, 4:28 am
These included Chandler v Thompson ((1811) 3 Camp 80, 170 ER 1312 [pdf]), Tapling v Jones (1865) 20 CBNS 166, 144 ER 1067 (HL)) and Turner v Spooner (1861) 30 LJ Ch 801 (Ch)), all of which discussed the opening of new windows overlooking neighbouring properties. [read post]
23 Mar 2008, 10:51 pm
Chandler, 163 F.3d 921, 924 (5th Cir.1999) (holding that "a prisoner must have suffered from the excessive force a more than de minimis injury") and Norman v. [read post]
19 May 2011, 2:59 pm
S’holders Litig.; Scully v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:39 am
Anderson v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:39 am
Anderson v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 8:39 am
Anderson v. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 11:37 am
Chandler, 723 F.3d 849, 852 (7th Cir. 2013). [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 2:29 pm
" Chandler v. [read post]
31 Jan 2007, 2:31 am
Elsie Chandler, Esq., Neighborhoiod Defender Service of Harlem, New York, for the Defense. [read post]
7 May 2022, 12:17 pm
NAACP v. [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 8:56 am
The case, Caperton 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]
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]
2 Jan 2012, 2:31 pm
Alternative Entity Cases CML V, LLC v. [read post]
