Search for: "Dreyer v City of Saratoga Springs" Results 1 - 4 of 4
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
Duty to defend and indemnify an employee being sued triggered by allegations of misconduct related to the performance of official duties
28 Jun 2012, 4:30 am
District Court for the Northern District of New York, Moore v Dreyer and Curley, 05-CV-1060 and Cornick v City of Saratoga Springs, Curley and Dreyer, 06-CV-0138. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
Duty to defend and indemnify an employee being sued triggered by allegations of misconduct related to the performance of official duties
17 Oct 2008, 11:32 am
District Court for the Northern District of New York, Moore v Dreyer and Curley, 05-CV-1060 and Cornick v City of Saratoga Springs, Curley and Dreyer, 06-CV-0138.Dreyer served as the City's Deputy Commissioner of Public Safety. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
Employee's request that his employer provide for his defense and indemnification in a civil action denied as the underlying act was beyond the scope of his employment
16 Aug 2022, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The Commissioner also noted that "[t]he record does not reveal whether [the Board of Education had] adopted the protections of Public Officers Law §18" but concluding that this would not affect the outcome of this appeal as Public Officers Law §18(3)(a) imposes an identical “scope of employment” requirement, citing Matter of Dreyer v City of Saratoga Springs, 43 AD3d 586. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/
Employee's request that his employer provide for his defense and indemnification in a civil action denied as the underlying act was beyond the scope of his employment
16 Aug 2022, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
" The Commissioner also noted that "[t]he record does not reveal whether [the Board of Education had] adopted the protections of Public Officers Law §18" but concluding that this would not affect the outcome of this appeal as Public Officers Law §18(3)(a) imposes an identical “scope of employment” requirement, citing Matter of Dreyer v City of Saratoga Springs, 43 AD3d 586. [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/