Search for: "STATE v KEEFE" Results 41 - 60 of 381
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Apr 2014, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
*Thus, explained the court, "an employee charged with failing to possess a minimum qualification of his or her position is only entitled to notice of the charge and the opportunity to contest it" and dismissed Petitioner’s action.* See, for example: Fowler v City of Saratoga Springs, 215 A.D.2d 819 (City Engineer lawfully dismissed for failure to obtain Professional Engineer’s license by a specified date); Meliti v Nyquist, 53 AD2d 951, affirmed 41 NY2d 183… [read post]
21 Feb 2023, 11:18 pm by Jordan Bierkos
Carling O’Keefe Breweries of Canada Ltd., 198827 B.C.L.R. (2d) 89 (BCCA), and Technicore Underground Inc. v. [read post]
15 Nov 2010, 6:44 am by James Bickford
  David Savage reports for the Los Angeles Times on Cullen v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 6:52 am
The federal court abstained, and one of the reasons for abstention is that the state court may choose an interpretation of the state statute that would avoid the federal constitutional question. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 2:49 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding: Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton) v Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL, heard 7 Mar 2017. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:31 am by Lyle Denniston
The denial of review in O’Keefe v. [read post]
3 Apr 2017, 4:09 am by Edith Roberts
” In The Washington Post, Ed O’Keefe reports that the battle to confirm Gorsuch to the U.S. [read post]
31 Mar 2008, 4:19 am
Recent criminal case may shed light on several civil discovery issuesDrinker Biddle & Reath LLP"In United States v. [read post]
9 Sep 2014, 6:07 am
By its own terms, Georgia’s stalking statute “shall not apply to persons engaged in activities protected by the Constitution of the United States or of this state. [read post]
7 Apr 2017, 4:29 am by Edith Roberts
” Briefly: At Justia’s Verdict blog, Sherry Colb discusses the court’s decision in Moore v. [read post]