Search for: "Hazen v. Hazen"
Results 1 - 20
of 47
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Nov 2016, 7:30 am
Administrative law — Real property — Merger of lots This appeal arises out of a dispute concerning two contiguous residential lots owned by appellee Crystal Creek Properties, LLC (“Crystal Creek”), adjacent to a lot owned by Susan Hazen and her son Joshua Hazen, appellants (“the Hazens”). [read post]
25 Aug 2009, 4:06 am
Woodman v. [read post]
19 Feb 2021, 7:06 am
Here are materials in Shopbell v. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 2:00 pm
Harris has filed an amicus brief in Sebelius v. [read post]
4 Apr 2016, 2:16 pm
The students argued the merits of a fictitious case Brendan Smith v. [read post]
13 Mar 2024, 10:03 am
The post FinCEN Update first appeared on Hazen Law Group LLC. [read post]
26 Jul 2019, 7:11 am
Here is the opinion in State of Washington v. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 7:47 am
Haberman successfully took a leading manufacturer of baby goods Jackel International to court for patent infringement (Haberman v Jackel International [1999] FSR 683). [read post]
4 Jan 2022, 4:13 am
Here are the materials in State v. [read post]
21 Jul 2010, 4:59 am
Supreme Court denied Hazen’s petition and the Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s ruling.The Appellate Division explained that Hazen sought to compel the removal of the letters to which she objected from her file, which was an action in the nature of mandamus.However, said the court, placing the letters in her personnel file and deciding whether or not to remove then when Hazen demand their being expunged, are essentially discretionary actions. [read post]
23 Jun 2008, 8:00 pm
The majority opinion, written by Justice Breyer, relied heavily on the Court's 1993 ruling in Hazen Paper Co. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 4:00 am
” Noting that the JHO found that Employee's conduct was only partially attributable to the disorders he claimed to suffer, the Appellate Division said that “the law does not immunize disabled employees from discipline or discharge for incidents of misconduct in the workplace,” citing Hazen v Hill Bettz and Nash, 92 AD3d 162, leave to appeal denied, 19 NY3d 812. [read post]
Chief Magistrate Judge Saporito of Federal Middle District Court Reviews Assumption of Risk Doctrine
9 Apr 2024, 5:00 am
In the case of Hazen v. [read post]
21 Jul 2017, 12:59 pm
See Gabelli v. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 11:46 am
D'Cunha v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 12:01 am
Practice point: The New York State Human Rights Law does not immunize disabled employees from discipline or discharge for misconduct in the workplace.Student note: EEOC Guideline No. 30 specifically provides that an employer may discipline an individual with a disability for violating a workplace conduct standard which is job-related and consistent with business necessity.Case: Hazen v. [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 2:00 pm
The students argued the merits of a fictitious case Brendan Smith v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 7:37 am
Supreme Court has held in Hazen Paper Co. v. [read post]
16 Jun 2008, 5:00 pm
We are following CSX v. [read post]
3 Oct 2016, 7:26 am
(quoting Hazen Paper Co. v. [read post]
