Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). ANALYSIS The Commissions review of the decision of an appointing authority to bypass a candidate for appointment to public safety civil service position is governed by Chapter 31, Sections 41-45 of the General Laws.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). See also, Mangino v. HRD, 27 MCSR 34 (2014) and cases cited (The notion underlying the summary decision process in administrative proceedings parallels the civil practice under Mass.R.Civ.P.56, namely, when no genuine issues of material fact exist, the agency is not required to conduct a meaningless hearing.); Morehouse v.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). See also Mangino v. HRD, 27 MCSR 34 (2014) and cases cited (The notion underlying the summary decision process in administrative proceedings parallels the civil practice under Mass. R. Civ. P. 56, namely, when no genuine issues of material fact exist, the agency is not required to conduct a meaningless hearing.); Morehouse v.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). See also Mangino v. HRD, 27 MCSR 34 (2014) and cases cited (The notion underlying the summary decision process in administrative proceedings parallels the civil practice under Mass.R.Civ.P.56, namely, when no genuine issues of material fact exist, the agency is not required to conduct a meaningless hearing.); Morehouse v.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005) ANALYSIS Pursuant to G.L.c.31, 22, HRD determine[s] the passing requirements of examinations. G.L.c. 31, 3 directs that HRD shall make rules which include provisions for open competitive and other examinations to test the practical fitness of applicants.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005) ANALYSIS Pursuant to G.L.c.31, 22, HRD determine[s] the passing requirements of examinations. G.L.c. 31, 3 directs that HRD shall make rules which include provisions for open competitive and other examinations to test the practical fitness of applicants.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005), Milliken & Co. v, Duro Textiles LLC, 451 Mass. 547, 550 n.6 (2008). All the evidence must be reviewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See id.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005) ANALYSIS G.L.c. 31, 41-45 provide that a tenured employee may be discharged, removed, suspended . . . laid off [or] transferred from his position without his written consent only for just 5 cause after due notice, hearing (which must occur prior to discipline other than a suspension from the payroll for five days or less) and a written notice of decision that states fully and specifically the reasons