Search for: "Matter of Boyle v Boyle"
Results 61 - 80
of 151
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2009, 1:00 am
Boyle, defendants-appellees
U.S. [read post]
21 Mar 2008, 1:44 am
STATE DECISIONS:
Boyle v. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 7:48 am
The Supreme Court in Zivotofsky v. [read post]
1 Feb 2017, 7:39 am
Bd. of Educ. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 8:00 am
See also O’Boyle v. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 4:00 am
Another element to consider is the extension of the probationary period in the event an employee is given a “light duty” or some other alternate assignment while serving his or her probationary period [see Boyle v Koch, 114 A.D.2d 78]. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 4:00 am
Another element to consider is the extension of the probationary period in the event an employee is given a “light duty” or some other alternate assignment while serving his or her probationary period [see Boyle v Koch, 114 A.D.2d 78]. [read post]
15 Feb 2010, 7:22 am
ACLU of Kentucky and Van Orden v. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 1:32 pm
” Boyle: The call for factfinding is good. [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 2:53 pm
In Matter of Birchwood Neighborhood Association v. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 5:42 am
Vacha v. [read post]
3 Apr 2012, 9:26 pm
v=ZsNlcr4frs4 For those of you who are devotees of this show, the encounter with Jonathan Antoine will remind you of Susan Boyle’s introduction to the world: www.youtube.com/watch? [read post]
23 Dec 2010, 3:09 am
"Such extensions of the probationary period may be applicable in other situations as well.For example, in the event an employee injured on the job is given a "light duty assignment," the courts have held that the appointing authority was not required to count the worker's "light duty service" for probationary purposes [Boyle v Koch, 68 NY2d 601]. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 9:41 am
Miranda v. [read post]
21 Aug 2007, 7:48 pm
Estate of Zlotowski v. [read post]
2 Apr 2018, 7:59 am
These policy matters should be left to the General Assembly. [read post]
12 Dec 2008, 1:14 pm
Delaney v. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 10:03 am
Bd. of Educ. v. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 9:45 pm
The ECtHR pointedly noted that: Article 13 cannot reasonably be interpreted so as to require a remedy in domestic law in respect of any supposed grievance under the Convention that an individual may have, no matter how unmeritorious his complaint may be: the grievance must be an arguable one in terms of the Convention (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom, cited above, § 52). [read post]
7 Jul 2009, 7:39 am
"); Boyle v. [read post]
