Search for: "PG PUBLISHING, INC."
Results 1 - 20
of 74
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2024, 4:00 am
Additionally, and in concert with the lawyer from the Office of the Chief Justice, the MAG lawyers will be able to share with the working group their employers’ collective disdain for either transparency or accountability (given the Superior Court ceased publishing an annual report and has resisted producing very basic information about its operations, which you can read about here[34]), which will of course frustrate any measurement as to whether any rules changes are ultimately… [read post]
30 Jan 2024, 9:02 pm
I dissent from the Commission’s denial of a petition to amend Rule 202.5(e), our so-called gag rule.[1] This de facto rule follows from the Commission’s enforcement of its policy, adopted in 1972, that it will not “permit a defendant or respondent to consent to a judgment or order that imposes a sanction while denying the allegations in the complaint or order for proceedings. [read post]
16 Jan 2024, 1:19 pm
Engelmayer in In re: Draftkings Inc. [read post]
10 May 2023, 4:00 am
Fundamental Law for Journalists Author: Mark Bourrie Publisher: Irwin Law Inc. [read post]
19 Jan 2023, 12:49 pm
A version of this article previously was published on Law360. [read post]
13 Oct 2022, 1:55 pm
A copy of this article previously was published on Law360. [read post]
26 May 2022, 8:47 am
Google, Inc., 474 F. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 5:51 am
Reliaguard, Inc., 2022 WL 1157481, No. [read post]
4 Apr 2022, 2:41 pm
PG Publishing Co. [read post]
2 Dec 2021, 11:32 am
” The court continues: The Supreme Court’s holdings in Tornillo, Hurley, and PG&E, stand for the general proposition that private companies that use editorial judgment to choose whether to publish content—and, if they do publish content, use editorial judgment to choose what they want to publish—cannot be compelled by the government to publish other content. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
In the first published opinion interpreting Senate Bill 35 (“SB 35”), a statutory process to streamline review of eligible residential and mixed-use development projects, the developer filed suit challenging the City of Berkeley’s decision to deny the developer’s request to apply the SB 35 process to a mixed-use infill development on an existing parking lot. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
In the first published opinion interpreting Senate Bill 35 (“SB 35”), a statutory process to streamline review of eligible residential and mixed-use development projects, the developer filed suit challenging the City of Berkeley’s decision to deny the developer’s request to apply the SB 35 process to a mixed-use infill development on an existing parking lot. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. [read post]
15 Jul 2021, 2:54 pm
A version of this article previously was published in Law360. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 12:51 am
In a partially published decision, the First District Court of Appeal reaffirmed prior rulings regarding administrative exhaustion under CEQA, and deference to an agency’s general plan consistency determinations. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 12:51 am
In a partially published decision, the First District Court of Appeal reaffirmed prior rulings regarding administrative exhaustion under CEQA, and deference to an agency’s general plan consistency determinations. [read post]
6 Jul 2021, 8:55 am
In a published opinion filed June 30, 2021, the First District Court of Appeal applied well-established CEQA statute of limitations rules, and a “persuasive dictum” from one of its prior decisions addressing the requirements for valid tolling agreements, to affirm a judgment dismissing a CEQA claim as time-barred. [read post]
29 Jun 2021, 11:41 am
Interestingly, before the 6th Edition of the Guides was published in 2008, “Classes” did not exist, only percentages. [read post]
3 Jun 2021, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. [read post]
