Search for: "Miller v. Planning Commission"
Results 181 - 200
of 308
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2019, 8:43 am
Indiana, 17-1511 Issues: (1) Whether Miller v. [read post]
4 May 2010, 2:11 pm
-Colin Miller [read post]
27 Feb 2019, 7:54 am
Indiana, 17-1511 Issues: (1) Whether Miller v. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 11:22 am
The Revised Project’s approval was upheld on Petitioners’ two subsequent administrative appeals to the Planning Commission and City Council. [read post]
26 Feb 2008, 1:10 am
(PDF 2.29 MB)Complaint as Filed With the Federal Election Commission on Feb. 25, 200802/25/2008
Dear Colleague Letter From Rep. [read post]
15 May 2011, 5:04 pm
On the same day, Mr Justice Vos heard applications in the phone hacking cases of Hoppen v NGN and Miller v NGN. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 8:00 am
Circuit considered whether the union could compel dissenters to contribute toward the cost of lobbying on airline-safety-related issues in Miller v. [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 3:17 pm
’” (Citing Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 2:13 am
On 10 March 2023 there was a contempt application in the case of Miller -v- Peake QB-2022-001106. [read post]
7 Sep 2012, 9:29 am
As reported by our friend Carlos Miller, on August 28th the Los Angeles Police Commission approved revisions to the SAR policy, dropping the reference to aesthetic value. [read post]
14 Jan 2019, 11:59 am
Industry Assn. v. [read post]
7 Aug 2022, 5:48 pm
County of Butte v. [read post]
15 Nov 2018, 9:01 pm
While the Lands Commission is instructed to confer approval more or less automatically in several classes of federal transactions, in others the Commission is given the right of first refusal to purchase the land interest itself, or to find a substitute purchaser other than the one to whom the federal government is planning to sell. [read post]
23 May 2022, 10:16 am
Tiburon Open Space Committee v. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 9:01 pm
In Fisher v. [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:47 pm
An area resident appealed the ZA’s decision to the Planning Commission, and then to the City Council, and after various interim steps in the City’s administrative proceedings (plaintiffs’ challenges to some of which are discussed in the opinion’s unpublished portion) the MND and project approval were upheld by the Council. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 2:53 am
Judgments The following reserved judgments after public hearings remain outstanding: Woodrow v Johansson, heard 19 January 2012 (HHJ Parkes QC) Miller v Associated Newspapers heard 21 to 25 May 2012 (Sharp J) SKA v CRH, heard 10 and 11 July 2012 (Nicola Davies J) Lord Ashcroft v Foley heard 20 July 2012 (Eady J) [read post]
19 Dec 2022, 11:07 am
Save North Petaluma River and Wetlands v. [read post]
11 Jan 2012, 3:38 am
Miller, finding that an affidavit in support of search warrant based on a dog sniff must establish the training and reliability of the drug-detecting dog. [read post]
6 Mar 2023, 1:41 am
The trial judge, Steyn J, held that the s.4 Defamation Act 2013 defence of public interest fell away after the National Crime Agency and Electoral Commission found that there was no evidence of Mr Banks receiving third party funding or acting as a third party’s agent. [read post]
