Search for: "State v. Kingston" Results 1 - 20 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2019, 1:25 pm by Giles Peaker
Indeed, I consider that this is what the agreement clearly states. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 4:22 am by Dennis Crouch
The Federal Circuit this week denied two interesting petitions for en banc rehearing: Kingston Technology Company v. [read post]
5 Nov 2010, 3:56 am
A settlement of a disciplinary action should be memorialize in writingWinkler v Kingston Housing Auth., 259 AD2d 819A public employee who faces disciplinary charges may enter into a settlement agreement that disposes the charges, so long as the waiver is knowingly and intelligently undertaken and serves as the consideration for the curtailment of pending disciplinary proceedings [see Whitehead v State of New York Department of Mental Hygiene, 71 AD2d 653]. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 1:45 am
Summary of Decision issued July 1, 2009Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.Case Name: McGarvey v. [read post]
16 Jan 2015, 4:00 am by The Public Employment Law Press
The City appealed.As indicated in an earlier decision a prior decision in this matter (Matter of Rea v City of Kingston, 110 AD3d 1227 [2013]).Rea from Assistant Fire Chief to Fire Chief of the City of Kingston Fire Department in January 2012. [read post]
25 Oct 2020, 10:21 pm by Unknown
As plaintiff is a Texas resident, and his sole remaining retaliation claim is asserted under a section of the Texas Labor Law, the motion court providently exercised its discretion in dismissing that claim on the ground of forum non conveniens, pursuant to CPLR 327[a].Kingston v. [read post]
27 Sep 2020, 6:36 pm by Dennis Crouch
Kingston Technology Company, Inc., No. 19-1459. [read post]
11 Nov 2017, 2:31 am by INFORRM
The decision in Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 2619 (QB) clarifies the application of the statutory defence of honest opinion under section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 10:01 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
"Plaintiffs, however, were not protesting the celebration itself, rather they were protesting and advocating political issues in connection with the State of Israel that may or may not have been directly implicated by the celebration." [read post]
30 Jun 2018, 4:45 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Kingston Technologies Co., No. 16-cv-00300, 2017 WL 3275615 (C.D. [read post]
20 Jun 2019, 6:14 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
In a nutshell, conservatives like limited state action in these cases, and liberals like broad state action. [read post]