Search for: "California Law Review"
Results 2801 - 2820
of 27,250
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Aug 2007, 1:36 pm
From the Kentucky Law Review:"Federal: California Lawyer Files Petition for Psychiatric Evaluation of Federal Judge but dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 2:51 pm
Considering a policy or law’s impact on the overall population of an animal species is required by multiple federal and state environmental laws. [read post]
14 Oct 2019, 7:00 am
If the California Supreme Court decides to review Vazquez, then it will likely take the Gonzales decision under review as well. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 8:55 am
Stephen Gardbaum (University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) - School of Law) has posted What the World Can Teach Us About Supreme Court Reform (UCLA Law Review Discourse, Forthcoming) on SSRN. [read post]
9 Jun 2021, 5:40 pm
appeared first on California Criminal Appeals Lawyer Blog. [read post]
3 Sep 2009, 11:31 pm
The Daily Reviewer has just selected "California Labor & Employment Law" as one of its Top 100 Legal Blogs. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 1:10 pm
Need to understand recent California laws prohibiting non-competes and how these laws affect California employers? [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 2:13 pm
(Reviewing Daniel Bodansky, The Art and Craft of International Environmental Law.) 38 Ecology L.Q. 553-561 (2011). [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 3:07 pm
In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court has chosen to not review Harris v. [read post]
1 Jan 2015, 9:01 pm
Moeser’s letter reassures deans that NCBE has “reviewed and re-reviewed” every “aspect of [its] methodology and execution[,]” and that the July 2014 test has been examined multiple times and by different, independent psychometricians to guarantee that it was no more difficult than the 2013 test or previous tests. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 1:24 pm
” The Court then discussed whether some version of the de minimis doctrine still applied in California pursuant to its existence as a general tenet of California law, as evidenced by California case law and California Civil Code section 3533, providing “The law disregards trifles. [read post]
27 Jul 2018, 1:24 pm
” The Court then discussed whether some version of the de minimis doctrine still applied in California pursuant to its existence as a general tenet of California law, as evidenced by California case law and California Civil Code section 3533, providing “The law disregards trifles. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 8:30 am
As reported on the Hunton Privacy & Information Security Law blog, on June 28, 2018, the Governor of California signed AB 375, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “Act”). [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 9:00 am
California is one of the few states that still allows prospective lawyers to “read the law. [read post]
13 Mar 2012, 7:00 am
It said the department instructs inspectors to first examine problems in light of state laws that allow them to levy fines of $1,000 to $100,000. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 9:13 pm
: Marriage, Gender, and Assisted Reproductive Technology (Southern California Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 101, 2010) on SSRN. [read post]
18 Mar 2008, 10:44 pm
Weisselberg (University of California, Berkeley - School of Law (Boalt Hall)) has posted Mourning Miranda (California Law Review, Forthcoming) on SSRN. [read post]
15 Jan 2023, 11:24 pm
Let’s review the arguments in the case, since they illuminate what taxpayers in their position should not do. ____________________________________ The rule is that if an individual is visiting California to perform a transaction or sign a contract or fulfill a relatively well-defined short-term project, it is considered temporary or transitory ____________________________________ Business Purpose The taxpayer’s major claim was that they were in… [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 12:15 am
Stats. ch. 938 (AB 2098), See California Legislates Covid-19 Orthodoxy and Could California Bill Result In Discipline Of C.D.C. [read post]
13 Jan 2016, 5:10 pm
Although they had been registered as domestic partners under California law since 2001, they were unable to marry due to the federal and state bans. [read post]
