Search for: "United States v. City and County of San Francisco"
Results 181 - 200
of 342
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jun 2018, 2:40 pm
PG&E owns and operates the Diablo Canyon plant, a two-unit nuclear power plant on 750-acres of land also owned by PG&E near Avila Beach in San Luis Obispo County. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:28 pm
City and County of San Francisco (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 261. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 10:35 am
City and County of San Francisco; and (2) whether, alternatively, federal courts can and should waive Williamson County’s state litigation requirement for prudential reasons when a federal takings claim is factually concrete without state procedures, as some circuit courts hold, or apply the requirement as a rigid jurisdictional barrier, as other circuits hold. [read post]
11 Nov 2008, 5:06 pm
As San Francisco Chief Deputy Attorney Therese M. [read post]
9 Mar 2018, 9:38 am
Ill.) may yield an answer -- unless the housing authority changes its policy, as San Francisco and Warren County (Illinois) had done. [read post]
8 Jan 2020, 10:12 am
Host Compliance, LLC is a San Francisco-based company that helps cities and counties enforce STR laws. [read post]
20 Nov 2014, 5:00 am
City and County of San Francisco v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
Regarding exhaustion, the court reasoned that because the County’s hearing notice did not provide any notice of the CEQA grounds it would used to comply with CEQA, as stated in Tomlinson v. [read post]
29 Apr 2016, 5:21 am
City and County of San Francisco; and (2) whether, alternatively, federal courts can and should waive Williamson County’s state litigation requirement for prudential reasons when a federal takings claim is factually concrete without state procedures, as some circuit courts hold, or apply the requirement as a rigid jurisdictional barrier, as other circuits hold. [read post]
29 Oct 2021, 3:55 pm
City and County of San Francisco, the justices agreed to decide whether a group of states, led by Arizona, can defend a contentious Trump-era immigration policy known as the “public charge” rule after the Biden administration declined to do so. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 12:46 pm
City and County of San Francisco, which held that a state court’s resolution of a claim for just compensation under state law will generally preclude any federal suit. [read post]
28 Feb 2013, 10:00 pm
Another respondent – the City and County of San Francisco – has filed a brief that more seriously addresses the standing issue over the course of ten pages. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 12:33 pm
City and County of San Francisco, California, involving an attempt by 14 states to intervene to defend the Trump administration’s controversial “public charge” immigration rule after the Biden administration declined to defend it in court. [read post]
15 Feb 2007, 12:25 am
Campbell, 500 P.2d 21, 33-34 (Kan. 1972); City & County of San Francisco v. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 7:41 pm
City of San Diego, S238563. [read post]
21 May 2015, 8:19 am
City and County of San Francisco 14-704 Issue: Whether San Francisco’s attempt to deprive law-abiding individuals of immediate access to operable handguns in their own homes is any more constitutional than the District of Columbia’s invalidated effort to do the same. [read post]
31 May 2011, 6:10 am
United States, in which the Court interpreted the scope of the federal witness tampering statute can be applied, while James Bickford summarized the Court’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 1:54 pm
Municipal Court of the City and County of San Francisco (1967) and Marshall v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:01 am
Wynne and City and County of San Francisco v. [read post]
3 Mar 2021, 5:01 am
If the federal government successfully coerced jurisdictions such as San Francisco and New York City into assisting with federal deportation efforts, for example, that could create tensions between those jurisdictions and the countries to which deportees are being returned. [read post]
