Search for: "State v. Hazelton"
Results 1 - 20
of 40
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Dec 2023, 2:49 pm
Hazelton and Rachael K. [read post]
26 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm
After an unsuccessful direct appeal, United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2023, 1:01 am
Howell v. [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 11:40 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,13 all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
21 Jan 2023, 11:40 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,13 all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
10 Oct 2021, 9:03 pm
The United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
Article V, §6, in pertinent part, requires that “Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state and all of the civil divisions thereof, including cities and villages, shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive…. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm
Article V, §6, in pertinent part, requires that “Appointments and promotions in the civil service of the state and all of the civil divisions thereof, including cities and villages, shall be made according to merit and fitness to be ascertained, as far as practicable, by examination which, as far as practicable, shall be competitive…. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,[13] all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,[13] all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,[13] all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 4:00 am
Again, as the court ruled in Hazelton v Connelly,[13] all that is required for a resignation to become operative is its delivery to the appointing authority prior to the appointing authority's receipt of an employee’s request to withdraw or rescind the resignation. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 9:05 pm
United States Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
" §2111 states that a school district officer "may resign to a district meeting. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 4:00 am
" §2111 states that a school district officer "may resign to a district meeting. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 4:00 am
" ** See Hazelton v Connelly, 25 NYS2d 74. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 4:00 am
" ** See Hazelton v Connelly, 25 NYS2d 74. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 4:00 am
Similarly, the New York State Civil Service Commission’s Rules for employees of the State as an employer provide, in pertinent part, as follows:“If no effective date is specified in a resignation, it shall take effect upon delivery to or filing in the office of the appointing authority. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 4:00 am
Similarly, the New York State Civil Service Commission’s Rules for employees of the State as an employer provide, in pertinent part, as follows:“If no effective date is specified in a resignation, it shall take effect upon delivery to or filing in the office of the appointing authority. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 11:29 am
However, it was also the rule of law that advanced religious freedom in Canada (in the 1959 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Roncarelli v. [read post]
