Search for: "McKinney v. Employment Division"
Results 1 - 20
of 33
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Mar 2023, 6:40 am
The recent case of Lipsky v. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 1:06 am
In Best Buy Co. v. [read post]
23 May 2024, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division essentially inverted Seymour's "nexus" standard by requiring the Board to come forward with evidence of a nexus to employment. [read post]
23 May 2024, 6:00 am
The Appellate Division essentially inverted Seymour's "nexus" standard by requiring the Board to come forward with evidence of a nexus to employment. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 11:34 am
He or she must have acted within the scope of her employment; 2. [read post]
13 Jun 2012, 5:25 am
He or she must have acted within the scope of her employment; 2. [read post]
22 Oct 2021, 4:00 am
School Dist., 21 AD3d 1134, quoting Assembly Memorandum in Support of Bill, 1996 McKinney's Session Laws of New York at 2050. [read post]
22 Oct 2021, 4:00 am
School Dist., 21 AD3d 1134, quoting Assembly Memorandum in Support of Bill, 1996 McKinney's Session Laws of New York at 2050. [read post]
23 Jan 2024, 6:13 am
See Colyer v. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 7:00 am
School Dist., 21 AD3d 1134, quoting Assembly Memorandum in Support of Bill, 1996 McKinney's Session Laws of New York at 2050. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 7:00 am
School Dist., 21 AD3d 1134, quoting Assembly Memorandum in Support of Bill, 1996 McKinney's Session Laws of New York at 2050. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 3:51 pm
McKinney Hosp. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 3:51 pm
McKinney Hosp. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
26 May 2022, 4:00 am
In other words, the moratorium statute does not permit an employer to whom the statute applies to provide retirees with lesser health insurance benefits than active employees'" (Matter of Altic v Board of Educ., 142 AD3d 1311, 1312, quoting Matter of Anderson v Niagara Falls City Sch. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 3:50 am
* Historical Note: See, also, McKinney's Unconsolidated Law §1041 which addressed the removal of police officers in the competitive class and Chapter 360 of the laws of 1911 addressing certain terms and conditions of employment affecting police officers. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 3:40 am
” In an op-ed for The New York Times, Linda Greenhouse worries about “the growing threat that an increasingly weaponized free-exercise clause poses to civil society,” particularly now that the court has agreed to consider whether to “overturn a 30-year-old decision, Employment Division v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 2:30 pm
The loan/bonus proportionately transformed into debt when the husband left his employment prior to December 2021. [read post]
