Search for: "Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith "
Results 1 - 20
of 89
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jul 2011, 3:52 am
Anatomy of a hearing officer's disciplinary findings and recommendationAverill Park CSD v Craig Landin, Decision of Hearing Officer Howard A. [read post]
2 May 2017, 8:57 pm
By 5:05 p.m., an officer had filed a disciplinary report and ordered a sanction of 45 days in disciplinary segregation. [read post]
3 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
[Smith v Hager, 185 A.D.2d 612]Demoting an employee for sleeping on duty on two occasions, although a hearing officer found the employee’s supervisor had “condoned” such conduct and the hearing officer had recommended a suspension without pay for three weeks. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Court denies educator's motion to rescind a settlement agreement resolving a disciplinary action because the educator had a change of mindNobile v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. [read post]
3 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Court denies educator's motion to rescind a settlement agreement resolving a disciplinary action because the educator had a change of mindNobile v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 3:45 am
In Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98 the Court of Appeals said that including charges concerning performance that were addressed in a counseling memorandum was not “double jeopardy. [read post]
13 Sep 2011, 5:13 am
” No, according to the Court of Appeal's ruling in Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98. [read post]
21 Jan 2010, 3:29 am
After the Supreme Court’s decision two months ago in Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
9 May 2011, 12:05 pm
A claim of double jeopardy is sometimes encountered in efforts to suppress a disciplinary action in situations were the charges reflect the same acts or omissions that were the subject of counseling memoranda or performance evaluations.The courts have rejected this theory.** In Patterson v Smith, 53 NY2d 98, the Court of Appeals said that including charges concerning performance that were addressed in a counseling memorandum was not “double… [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 12:02 pm
Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
13 May 2021, 11:56 am
The Delaware Supreme Court’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel has compiled materials and case excerpts relevant to attorneys admitted pro hac vice. [read post]
16 Feb 2024, 12:00 pm
From Massachusetts judge Brian Davis's opinion Monday in Smith v. [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 4:05 am
In the meanwhile, Kearney moved for leave to withdraw as counsel for Smith in the federal court action and described why he wished to so withdraw -- the threats Smith allegedly made against Tillem. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 12:00 am
[Smith v Hager, 185 A.D.2d 612]Demoting an employee for sleeping on duty on two occasions, although a hearing officer found the employee’s supervisor had “condoned” such conduct and the hearing officer had recommended a suspension without pay for three weeks. [read post]
14 Dec 2017, 11:28 am
Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio that limited factual disclosures serve the state’s interest in protecting the public from misleading and deceptive commercial speech. [read post]
18 Jan 2010, 3:42 am
The only significant decision out of Washington last week was Smith v. [read post]
2 Jan 2016, 12:11 pm
Smith v. [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 10:17 am
") AC29387 - Smith v. [read post]
22 Nov 2016, 9:50 am
" The Court cites Smith v. [read post]
5 Jun 2023, 6:00 am
In response to questioning by petitioner’s counsel, respondent agreed that a rifle or a shotgun is a firearm (Tr. 162, 167-68). [read post]