Search for: "Good v. State of California" Results 3341 - 3360 of 7,488
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jul 2010, 7:07 pm by Peter Spiro
  Where the brief cites the 1941 decision in Hines v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 9:18 pm by Ken
As Patrick referenced, the Supreme Court recently struck down another censorious law in U.S. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2021, 12:48 pm by Daniel Shaviro
That is, one is looking at the Arizona rule independently of the question of how it fits with other states' rules.Bibb balancing - In Bibb v. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 12:42 pm by Howard Friedman
Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea should be of no concern to us. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 2:31 pm by Eugene Volokh
Aaron Caplan, and me, urging the California Court of Appeal to reverse the order. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 12:25 pm
California, No. 07-6053, seeking review of People v. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 4:18 pm by Kent Scheidegger
"  Twice in recent years  the United States Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutionality of JLWOP for murder cases, first in the Roper v Simmons decision in 2005, then in 2010's Graham v Florida decision. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 11:56 am
Regents of University of California, 47 Cal.3d 376, 392 (1988), the court stated, "An EIR, when looked at as a whole, must provide a reasonable, good faith disclosure and analysis of the project's environmental impacts. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 11:56 am
Regents of University of California, 47 Cal.3d 376, 392 (1988), the court stated, "An EIR, when looked at as a whole, must provide a reasonable, good faith disclosure and analysis of the project's environmental impacts. [read post]
21 Nov 2019, 6:03 am by Derek T. Muller
-Portland 1.72 $93,755 $54,500 Florida State Univ. 1.73 $81,159 $47,000 Univ. of Notre Dame 1.73 $130,589 $75,500 Univ. of Washington-Seattle 1.74 $109,405 $63,000 Univ. at Buffalo 1.75 $90,928 $52,100 Univ. of California-Irvine 1.75 $119,986 $68,700 Univ. of Akron Main 1.75 $73,756 $42,200 Michigan State Univ. [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 6:27 am by Richard Hunt
The district court dismissed her claims under California state law because it found the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction was not appropriate. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 8:37 am by Florian Mueller
None whatsoever.History could now repeat itself in connection with the Apple v. [read post]