• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
Displaying 54-68 of 355 results

Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele - Proof of Service

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele, Proof of Service (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
) ) I, Mathew Planalp, being duly sworn according to law and being over the age of 18, upon my oath depose and say that:
I am retained by Counsel of Record for Amicus Curiae Richard J. Peltz- Steele.
In addition, the brief has been submitted through the Court’s electronic filing system.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Notary Public State of New York No. 01BR6004935 Qualified in Richmond County Commission Expires March 30, 2026
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of The Buckeye Institute - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of The Buckeye Institute, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains 3,839 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on this 22nd day of August, 2024.
Sworn to and subscribed before me on this 22nd day of August, 2024.
Notary Public State of New York No. 01BR6004935 Qualified in Richmond County Commission Expires March 30, 2026
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Advancing American - Main Document

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Advancing American, Main Document (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
As argued above, association is not a “second-class right.” Nonetheless, the mandatory representation requirement at issue here cannot even survive exacting scrutiny, the test courts have generally applied in compelled association ...
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Coalition for a - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Coalition for a, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
No. 24-71 In the Supreme Court of the United States Avraham Goldstein, et al. v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al.
As required by the Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains 5,246 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on this the 22nd day of August, 2024.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation - Proof of Service

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation, Proof of Service (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
in his official capacity as Chairperson of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ROSEMARYA.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on August 22, 2024, three (3) copies of the BRIEF OF FREEDOM FOUNDATION AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERSin the above-captioned case were served, as required by U.S. Supreme Court Rule 29.5(c), on the following:
61 Broadway, Suite 1500 New York, NY 11105 Counsel for PSC / CUNY CLELAND B. WELTON,IT, Esq.
28 Liberty Street New York, NY 10005 Counsel for CUNY, Wirenius, Townley, Zumbolo, DiNapoli
Room 6-178 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007 Counsel for City ofNY
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Coalition for a - Main Document

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Coalition for a, Main Document (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
19 But none of these guardrails applies to these new “coregulation” schemes.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation - Main Document

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation, Main Document (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
Nonetheless, the Ninth Circuit 13 repeated the same Knight language regarding the plaintiffs’ right to associate with whom they so desire to hold that Knight precluded a right to disassociate from the union); Hendrickson v. Am.
She was nonetheless put on that slate in violation of her First Amendment right to freedom of association.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Mackinac Center for - Main Document

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Mackinac Center for, Main Document (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
This Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME, 585 U.S. 878 (2018), reversed Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977) and held that charging public-sector employees agency fees to support a union’s exclusive representative violated the First Amendment.
In discussing an originalism argument made in support of agency fees by the union respondent in Janus, this Court noted: “the concept of a private third-party entity the power to bind employees on the terms of their employment likely would have been foreign to the Founders.
This Court has indicated that exclusive representation in the public sector has dramatically increased after Abood, and the concept of a private third-party entity with the power to bind employees on the terms of their employment (mandatory bargaining) is a foundation of “modern labor law.” Id. at 904 n. 7 and 924.
Knight, 465 U.S. at 285 (“Nothing in the First Amendment or in this Court’s case law interpreting it suggests that the rights to speak, association, and petition require government policymakers to listen or respond to individual’s communications on public issues.”).
Further, this Court has recognized that public-sector unions are not driven as much by market forces: The appellants’ second argument is that in any event collective bargaining in the public sector is inherently “political” and thus re- quires a different result under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Coalition for a - Proof of Service

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Coalition for a, Proof of Service (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
No. 24-71 In the Supreme Court of the United States Avraham Goldstein, et al. v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al.
I, Shelly N. Gannon, being eighteen years or older, do certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
That, on this, the 22nd day of August, 2024, I filed forty (40) paper copies via UPS Ground Transportation of the foregoing with the United States Supreme Court.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Mackinac Center for - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Mackinac Center for, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains 4,136 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on this 22nd day of August, 2024.
Sworn to and subscribed before me on this 22nd day of August, 2024.
Notary Public State of New York No. 01BR6004935 Qualified in Richmond County Commission Expires March 30, 2026
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele - Main Document

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele, Main Document (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
In upholding this arrangement, the courts below believed themselves bound by this Court’s decision in Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight, 465 U.S. 271 (1984), which they held stands for the proposition that exclusive bargaining schemes are constitutional.
One interest often proffered is “labor peace,” meaning the “avoidance of the conflict and disruption that it envisioned would occur if the employees in a unit were represented by more than one union” because “inter-union rivalries would foster dissension within the work force, and the employer could face ‘conflicting demands from different unions.’” Janus, 585 U.S. at 933.
In both cases, the incremental additional burden of negotiating salary on top of the potential or past performance evaluation already undertaken may be slight, and the payoff for talent management significant.
The lower courts that have addressed this issue believed themselves bound by this Court’s decision in Minnesota State Board for Community Colleges v. Knight, 465 U.S. 271 (1984), which they held stands for the proposition that exclusive bargaining schemes are constitutional.
The state exclusive representation requirement takes away dissenting employees’ “choice ... not to propound a particular point of view,” a matter “presumed to lie beyond the government’s power to control,” in the same way that compelling a parade organizer to accept a group carrying a banner with an unwanted message would do so.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of StandWithUs submitted - Proof of Service

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of StandWithUs submitted, Proof of Service (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
I HEREBY CERTIFYthat on August 22, 2024, three (3) copies of the BRIEF OF STANDWITHUS AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORTOF PETITIONERSin the above-captioned case were served, as required by U.S. Supreme Court Rule 29.5(c), on the following:
COHEN, WEISS AND SIMON LLP 909 Third Avenue, 12th Floor New York, NY 10022 Scott A. KRONLAND,ESQ.
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP Suite 300 177 Post Street San Francisco, CA 94108
61 Broadway, Suite 1500 New York, NY 11105 Counsel for PSC /CUNY CLELAND B. WELTON,II, Esq.
28 Liberty Street New York, NY 10005 Counsel for CUNY, Wirentius, Townley, Zumbolo, DiNapoli
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Richard J Peltz-Steele, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
OF NEW YORK; JOHN WIRENIUS, in his official capacity as chairperson of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ROSEMARY A. TOWNLEY, in her official capacity as member of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ANTHONY ZUMBOLO, in his official capacity as Member of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; CITY OF NEW YORK; THOMAS P. DINAPOLI, in his official capacity as New York State Comptroller,
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the brief for amicus curiae Richard J. Peltz-Steele contains 4,748 words, excluding the parts of the brief that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
Executed on August 22, 2024.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Jeffrey Schwab Counsel of Record Liberty Justice Center 7500 Rialto Blvd.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of StandWithUs submitted - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of StandWithUs submitted, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
in his official capacity as Chairperson of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ROSEMARYA.
TOWNLEY,in herofficial capacity as Memberof the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ANTHONY ZUMBOLO,in his official capacity as Memberof the New York Public Employee Relations Board; CITY OF NEW YORK; THOMAS DINAPOLI,in his official capacity as New York State Comptroller, Respondents.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains 2,723 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation - Certificate of Word Count

Document Avraham Goldstein, et al., Petitioners v. Professional Staff Congress/CUNY, et al., 24-71, Amicus brief of Freedom Foundation, Certificate of Word Count (U.S. Aug. 22, 2024)
No. 24-71 IN THE Supreme Court of the Anited States
Crry UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK; JOHN WIRENIUS, _in his official capacity as Chairperson of the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ROSEMARY A. TOWNLEY,in herofficial capacity as Memberof the New York Public Employee Relations Board; ANTHONY ZUMBOLO,in hisofficial capacity as Memberof the New York Public Employee Relations Board; CITy OF NEW YORK; THOMAS DINAPOLI,in his official capacity as New York State Comptroller, Respondents.
On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the document contains 4,514 words, excluding the parts of the document that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(d).
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... >>