Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Labor & Employment Law
: New York Public Personnel LawRemoval from the payroll
Kahn v SUNY Health Science Center, 271 AD2d 656
The employer tells the employee that he or she is off the payroll. The employee sues, seeking a court order barring this action pending the trial challenging his or her termination on the ground that he or she would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were not issued because:
(1) If he or she were removed from the payroll he or she would have no one to support him;
(2) He or she he would be unable to live in the New York metropolitan area; and
(3) He or she would be unable to prosecute the lawsuit challenging the termination.
These were the claims made by Mahmood Khan when the State University of New York Health Science told him it was removing him from his faculty position with the university. Although a State Supreme Court judge issued granted the injunction, the Appellate Division, reversed the lower court and vacated the order.
The standards for granting a preliminary injunction are such situations are clear. The party seeking the order must show that:
(1) He or she is likely to succeed on the merits;
(2) He or she would suffer irreparable injury if the provisional relief is withheld; and
(3) A balancing of the equities weighing in favor of the moving party.
The Appellate Division, assuming that Kahn had indeed made an adequate showing of merit and that the equities balance in his favor, said that he failed to establish irreparable injury, the third element he was required to demonstrate. According to the court, Khan?s contentions were wholly speculative and conclusory, and, therefore, are insufficient to satisfy the burden of demonstrating irreparable injury.
Kahn also argued that if he were to be out of work for an extended period, he would have to return to Australia and would never be able to obtain United States citizenship. As he had not raised this argument before the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division said he was precluded from raising it in the appeal because absent matters that may be judicially noticed, new facts may not be injected at the appellate level.
.
Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on March 02, 2011 (boomark / email).
Teachers Paid
LA School District pays 8% interest to teachers for payroll problems.

Payroll companies and the IRS- for Florida Small Businesses
Review: Pensoft Payroll 2010 Professional Edition
Fold Payroll Tax Into Income Tax, End Tax Withholding
Group Home Violated California Labor Law, Over and Over
Pay Attention to Your Chapter 13 Payroll Deduction
Bad web marketing: Fidelity HR/Payroll








