Search for: "U. S. v. Pelle" Results 1 - 20 of 30
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Feb 2012, 3:20 am
” Under the circumstances, said Justice Jaffee, the educator’s termination is so disproportionate to her offense as to shock one’s sense of fairness, applying the Pell Doctrine [Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 4:00 am
No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, said that u under the circumstances presented the termination of the individual's employment “was not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness. [read post]
14 Nov 2009, 1:14 am
Although the facts and history are odd, there is some useful material in HHJ Pelling QC's judgment which may be of wider relevance in such cases. [read post]
14 May 2011, 4:03 am
” Further, the court observed, in Pell v Board of Education, 34 NY2d 222, the Court of Appeals set out the standard for determining the appropriate penalty is whether the punishment imposed is "...so disproportionate to the offense, in light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness. [read post]
2 Feb 2010, 3:01 am
”The ALJ also rejected CSEA’s arguments that employees' privacy rights were affected [PERB decisions U-26816; see, also Matter of CSEA and the Village of Hempstead, PERB decisions U-27074].* The administrative disciplinary action underlying the Chancellor's decision was heard by OATH Administrative Law Judge Tynia Richard. [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 9:56 am
The anatomy of a disputed claim for GML §207-c benefitsParker v Village of Johnson City, 2010 NY Slip Op 50957(U), Decided on May 26, 2010, Supreme Court, Broome County, Ferris D. [read post]
7 May 2009, 4:15 am
" The ALJ also rejected CSEA's arguments that employees' privacy rights were affected [PERB decisions U-26816; see, also Matter of CSEA and the Village of Hempstead, PERB decisions U-27074].* The administrative disciplinary action underlying the Chancellor's decision was heard by OATH Administrative Law Judge Tynia Richard. [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 5:20 am by The Public Employment Law Press
Determining an appropriate disciplinary penalty "under the circumstances"King v New York State Off. of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Servs., 2017 NY Slip Op 03098, Appellate Division, Third DepartmentFigueroa v New York State Off. of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Servs., 2017 NY Slip Op 03104, Appellate Division, Third DepartmentAs the Court of Appeals explained in Pell v Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale and… [read post]
21 Apr 2021, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
" Noting that "A court may set aside an administrative penalty only if it is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness", the Appellate Division opined that "[u]nder the circumstances here, the penalty of termination of the [Plaintiff's] employment was not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness," citing Matter of Pell v… [read post]
21 Apr 2021, 7:30 am by Public Employment Law Press
" Noting that "A court may set aside an administrative penalty only if it is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness", the Appellate Division opined that "[u]nder the circumstances here, the penalty of termination of the [Plaintiff's] employment was not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness," citing Matter of Pell v… [read post]
20 Oct 2008, 11:10 am
"The test of whether a decision is arbitrary or capricious is "determined largely by whether a particular action should have been taken or is justified . . . and whether the administrative action is without foundation in fact.'" (See Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222].Other points made by Justice Feinman:1. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 3:32 am
” Characterizing the police officer’s misconduct  “an aberration from his otherwise exemplary career over approximately two decades,” and that termination would work an extreme hardship on the officer’s innocent family, the Appellate Division, Judge Sweeny dissenting, concluded that “[u]nder these circumstances, even in light of the repellent behavior exhibited by [the officer], the deprivation of his retirement benefits is… [read post]