Search for: "City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court" Results 221 - 240 of 367
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Jul 2012, 10:31 am
The Superior Court sided with the city, and when Pack appealed, the California Court of Appeal ruled that the local ordinance was preempted by federal law, namely the Controlled Substances Act. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 5:59 am by John H Curley
Arbitrator Das’ award can be found at the APWU website here.California Supreme Court determines courts cannot compel arbitration if the issue conflicts with the Education CodeIn United Teachers of Los Angeles v. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 4:44 pm
  I can't tell why he's regularly issuing search warrants (as opposed to the hundreds of other lower-level judicial officers in Los Angeles), but presume there's a reason. [read post]
22 May 2012, 2:45 pm
The Los Angeles City Attorney filed a criminal complaint against Widom in November 2009. [read post]
6 May 2012, 5:24 am by Benjamin Wittes
The Judge’s answer is superior to Sarah Palin’s: The Los Angeles Times, USA Today, the Washington Post, and others. [read post]
1 May 2012, 10:38 am by Michael Reiter, Attorney at Law
Burbank Police Department et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case BC414602, Filed May 28, 2009. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 12:53 pm by AALRR
"  The case was deemed fully briefed on March 26, 2012, but on April 11, 2012, the  Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters filed a request for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of the plaintiff and appellant. [read post]
2 Apr 2012, 10:56 am by Jonathan Zasloff
Mono Lake began to dry up because the City of Los Angeles, starting in 1941, pumped water from its tributary streams into the Los Angeles Aqueduct: by the time of the Mono Lake case, the City got roughly one-sixth of its water from Mono. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 2:16 pm by Steven G. Pearl
The Court held: The trial court (Los Angeles Superior, Judge Soussan Bruguera) erred by refusing to give a "mixed-motive" jury instruction (BAJI No. 12.26) and instead giving a "motivating factor" instruction (CACI No. 2500); but  The error did not entitle the city to judgment notwithstanding the verdict because there was substantial evidence to support the verdict for Harris. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 10:48 am
  Especially when it involves reputations and careers.So I'm glad to see the Court of Appeal reverse the judgment here. [read post]
2 Feb 2012, 8:30 am by Steven G. Pearl
Joaquin then sued the City of Los Angeles, alleging that the City terminated him in retaliation for filing his sexual harassment complaint in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). [read post]