My Remembrance of New York City on 9/11
I was in New York City on 9/11. Five years ago on this blog, I posted my remembrance of that horrible day. And, as I wrote last year, I also will never forget the days that followed, as desperate family members searched for loved ones and the faces of everyone in that usually vital city reflected shock and fear. Those who suffered injury or lost loved ones on 9/11 bear the deepest scars from that day. My deepest sympathy goes out to them. Unfortunately, all of us who were alive then to remember the horror bear scars on some level. Let our scars be reminders that violence and aggression should never be perceived as means to an end.
Read more detail on Recent Technology Posts –
Legal notice about the My Remembrance of New York City on 9/11
rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.
Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to My Remembrance of New York City on 9/11?
- 9/11 Remembrance
- 9/11 — A Personal Remembrance
- Blog Post: New York City To Appeal Climate Suit Dismissal To 2nd Circ.
- Family of Asthma Victim Sues Eatery, New York City Injury Lawyer
- Benefits available to certain New York City management personnel modified by subsequent personnel order issued by the mayor
- Virtual Reality Technology Offers Opportunities to Address, and Perpetrate, Sexual Harassment in New York City and Elsewhere
- TechStars Comes to New York City
- UPDATE: New York City Council Enacts Package of Legislation Aimed at Strengthening Anti-Sexual Harassment Policies
- Examining the persistently significant number of marijuana arrest in New York City
- Unsatisfactory rating voided because employee's "performance review," failed to comply with the employer's own procedures and thus undermined the integrity of the process Joyce v City of New York, 2018 NY Slip Op 03433, Appellate Division, First Department The Appellate Division annulled the determination of respondent New York City Department of Education [DOE] sustaining the "unsatisfactory" rating for the 2010-2011 academic year give to John Joyce, a tenured teacher. The court said that the record demonstrates "deficiencies in the performance review process" that resulted in Mr. Joyce being given an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year. Citing Matter of Gumbs v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 125 AD3d 484, and Matter of Richards v Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y., 117 AD3d 605, the Appellate Division noted that these deficiencies "were not merely technical, but undermined the integrity and fairness of the process." Mr. Joyce had received a satisfactory rating for the previous academic year and, in contravention of its own procedures, DOE failed to place him on notice that he was in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating for the 2010-2011 academic year until after April 28, 2011. Although DOE's procedures required that tenured teachers in danger of receiving an unsatisfactory rating have "formal observations including a pre-observation and post-observation conference by the principal … as part of a prescriptive plan to improve their teaching," Mr. Joyce received only one formal observation which took place one week before the end of the academic year and was not part of a prescriptive plan to improve his performance as a teacher. The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_03433.htm
This entry was posted in Technology & Cyberlaw
and tagged 9/11
. Bookmark the permalink