Search for: "Place v. Commissioner of Social Security"
Results 241 - 260
of 426
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 May 2024, 10:13 pm
On Tuesday 14 May 2024 there was an application for security for costs in the case of Sikhs for Justice and another v Ranger KB-2022-004490. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 9:06 pm
Commissioner of Social Security are simple. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 12:05 am
To avert this self-perpetuating tragedy, we need to have in place systems that ensure continuing cooperation. [read post]
14 Feb 2016, 4:02 pm
The judgement of HHJ Moloney QC in the curious international harassment case of Power Places Tours Inc & Ors v Free Spirit [2015] EWHC 3886 (QB) given on 10 December 20 [read post]
13 Feb 2018, 7:46 am
" New York Times v. [read post]
15 Jul 2022, 4:00 am
Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. [read post]
9 Oct 2023, 1:52 am
As a result, content posted to the platform could then be shared on social media, and social media platforms would, potentially, be prevented from removing it. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 12:51 pm
Quazzo v. [read post]
6 Dec 2020, 4:45 pm
Declassified later received an apology by the Ministry following the incident and Defence Secretary Ben Wallace confirmed that an independent review would take place into the allegations. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 7:06 pm
That reappearance assumes three forms--each, like the great protagonists of the Wheel of Time series, represents a different cluster of beliefs and practices, that is a different way of looking at the world, These different imaginaries each reflect the time, space, and place where they arose. [read post]
25 Oct 2017, 3:54 am
Citations in the post are to that list and to paragraph numbers in the Communication.Index to Issues and AnnexPresumed illegalDue process at sourceLegal competence v practical competenceDue process v quality standardsManifest illegality v contextual informationIllegality on the face of the statute v prosecutorial discretionOffline v onlineMore is better, faster is bestLiability shield v removal toolNational laws v coherent EU… [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 12:19 am
The decision in the House of Lords in Austin v The Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis, finding that ‘kettling’ peaceful protesters and bystanders for 7 hours did not create a deprivation of liberty, has been heavily criticised; it was expected that the ECtHR would take a different stance. [read post]
21 Jun 2020, 7:11 am
Nyanzi v. [read post]
25 Oct 2017, 3:54 am
Citations in the post are to that list and to paragraph numbers in the Communication.Index to Issues and AnnexPresumed illegalDue process at sourceLegal competence v practical competenceDue process v quality standardsManifest illegality v contextual informationIllegality on the face of the statute v prosecutorial discretionOffline v onlineMore is better, faster is bestLiability shield v removal toolNational laws v coherent EU… [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
19 Nov 2011, 1:03 am
AstrueCourt: U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket: 11-4096 November 10, 2011 Judge: Ebel Areas of Law: Government & Administrative Law, Public Benefits Plaintiff-Appellant Thomas Richardson appealed a district court's order that affirmed the Commissioner of Social Security's denial of his application for Childhood Disability Benefits. [read post]
24 Oct 2018, 4:33 pm
But now, a year or so after the EDGAR data breach, with four (out of five) new SEC commissioners, the SEC’s interest in investigating and charging outsider trading appears to be waning and is no longer a priority. [read post]
