This information is presented for information purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, accounting, or other professional advice. Individuals concerned about their own individual tax situation are encouraged to consult with a professional advisor. Furthermore, the information in this kit is also subject to change at any time as laws and regulations change.
Move forward at Nashville State. | Nashville State Community College
Skip to content. You are currently viewing benefits for the calendar year: January 1, — December 31, January 1, — December 31, Below are some examples of eligible expenses: Co-pays, deductibles, and other payments that you are responsible for under your health plan Routine exams, dental care, prescription drugs, eye care, hearing aids, orthodontia check with your employer to determine if orthodontia is allowed under your plan and what reimbursement method is used , well-baby care, etc.
Certain over-the-counter health care expenses valid prescription by doctor is required such as Tylenol, Motrin, etc. How much money should I contribute to my account? How do I pay for eligible expenses? If you are prompted to enter a Personal Identification Number PIN and do not have it, ask the provider to process the transaction so that you may sign the receipt.
Filing a Manual Claim If you do not use your MyAmeriFlex Card to pay for an eligible expense, you can also pay for the expenses out-of-pocket and then get reimbursed from your FSA by filing a manual claim. Do I need my receipts? Tax Implications Will pre-taxing have an impact on Social Security benefits? Johnson of his non-renewal was prepared early the following week, and President Carver signed that letter and sent it to Mr.
Johnson on 6 June President Carver stated:. I did not know when I signed the letter that Mr.
Johnson had filed a request for hearing on Workers Compensation. That action by Mr. Johnson had nothing to do with my decision regarding Mr. Johnson's contract.
Academic Programs Menu
Although I now know, from having been told and having reviewed the documents, that the College received a copy of the hearing request by Mr. Johnson's attorney on June 4, I did not know that at the time we acted on Mr. Johnson's contract status, the attorney's letter was delivered to the College's HR Office and to our insurance carrier, Key Risk Management. I did not learn about Mr.
Johnson's request for a Workers Compensation hearing until much later, when I was advised that he had filed a lawsuit regarding the non-renewal of his contract in which it was alleged the College had retaliated against him for seeking a hearing on Workers Compensation. President Carver concluded by asserting that "[t]he College's decision not to renew [Mr. Johnson's] contract was based on his unacceptable actions and behavior as an employee. Barkalow's affidavit similarly stated that "[t]he decision not to renew Mr. Johnson's contract was made before the College knew Mr.
Johnson had filed a request for hearing before the Industrial Commission. Johnson's annual contract was not renewed due to a period of extended unauthorized absence from work, misrepresentation of his status. Although Mr. Johnson was served on 15 August with notice that the summary judgment hearing had been calendared for 8 September , Mr. Johnson filed no brief or evidence in response to the summary judgment motion.
In addition, Mr. Johnson and his counsel did not appear for the summary judgment hearing. On 8 September , the trial court entered an order granting summary judgment to the College. The court determined that Mr. Johnson was "unable to forecast any evidence which rebuts the Affidavits and exhibits submitted on behalf of the College that show the College was not aware of the Workers Compensation filing and did not consider that filing as part of its consideration of the events and circumstances when it made the decision not to renew Mr.
Johnson's claim was barred by collateral estoppel or res judicata as a result of the ESC's determination, as upheld by the superior court, that Mr. Johnson had been terminated for misconduct. Johnson timely appealed to this Court from the order granting summary judgment. This Court reviews a trial court's ruling on a motion for summary judgment de novo. Falk Integrated Techs. Stack , N. The moving party has the burden of establishing a lack of any triable issue, and we consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.
Johnson first contends that the trial court erred in basing its summary judgment decision on the absence of a genuine issue of material fact as to the merits of his claim because the College's motion did not include that ground as a basis for granting its motion. We disagree. Our review of the motion indicates that the College argued both claim preclusion and the merits. Indeed, the affidavits of President Carver and Ms.
Barkalow, attached to the motion, address only the merits of Mr. Johnson's claim and do not address the claim preclusion argument. Turning to the question whether the trial court properly concluded that no genuine issue of material fact existed, we first note that "a prima facie showing of retaliatory discharge requires a plaintiff to show: 1 he engaged in some protected activity. Comm'n of N. Peace , N. In this case, the College argues that no issue of fact existed as to the third element of the claim.
President Carver's and Ms.
- What it Really Costs?
- Annual report of Nash Community College :: State Publications.
- Moodle hcc.
- tampa yellow pages for candy makers.
- where can i find cheap cars for sale;
- free background checks palm beach county.
- home truths on family care find!
Barkalow's affidavits set out facts indicating that the decision not to renew Mr. Johnson's contract, which was made before they knew he had requested a workers' compensation hearing, was based on his absences from work without permission, violation of the College's policy on leave, and misrepresentations about his ability to return to work. This forecast of evidence was sufficient to meet the College's burden on the motion for summary judgment.
Eveready Battery Co. Real Estate Equities, Inc. Here, Mr. Johnson filed nothing in opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Johnson contends, however, that the affidavits submitted by Ms. Barkalow and President Carver were signed in bad faith. According to Mr. Since many streams have been impacted by runoff and pollution, biologists are concerned about the waterdog population status.http://gemlik16.com/libraries/386/jyva-rootsuz-whatsapp-takip.php
Nash Community College
To make the results comparable with the previous data, identical protocol was followed. The data collected was entered and submitted to North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission biologists. The Neuse River waterdog is a completely aquatic salamander with feathery gills on each side of its head. Large adults are less than 12 inches in length from the tip of the nose to the tip of the tail.
They are brown with black spots and four toes on each of four feet, with a flat paddle-like tail that aids in swimming. Neuse River waterdogs are active at night and very unlikely to be seen by people without the implementation of special techniques to find the creatures. They are currently a candidate for federal endangered species listing mainly due to their sensitivity to environmental conditions.