Search for: "Matter of Spence v Shah" Results 1 - 1 of 1
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
A party challenging a rule or regulation adopted by a State agency has the heavy burden of showing that the regulation was unreasonable and unsupported by any evidence
13 Apr 2016, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
OMH subsequently adopted a permanent regulation that incorporated the mandatory mask-wearing requirement into its Rules concerning preventing influenza transmission [see 14 NYCRR 509].** In Matter of Spence v Shah, 136 AD3d 1242, the Appellate Division determined that the DOH regulation was not arbitrary, capricious, irrational or contrary to law.The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2016/2016_02696.htm [read post]
New York Public Personnel Law - https://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/