Search for: "Fish v. State"
Results 321 - 340
of 3,401
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Jun 2022, 11:49 am
The company compares the season pass to state-issued recreational licenses, such as hunting or fishing licenses, which can be revoked without refund. [read post]
31 May 2022, 6:33 pm
Earlier today, a California state appellate court ruled that bees qualify as "fish" under the state's Endangered Species Act, and thus four species of bees could be listed as endangered under a provision of the Act that covers "fish. [read post]
31 May 2022, 6:16 pm
" In Almond Alliance of California v. [read post]
31 May 2022, 1:14 pm
The California statute says that the state is allowed to list as endangered any "native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant. [read post]
31 May 2022, 3:26 am
Creel Abogados, S.C. and Carlos Creel Carrera v. [read post]
24 May 2022, 7:46 am
Justice Randy Sue Marber's decision last week in Chimichurri Chicken Corp. v. [read post]
19 May 2022, 3:54 pm
In Leather, Inc. v. [read post]
19 May 2022, 8:36 am
Rawson v. [read post]
18 May 2022, 8:07 am
Williamson v. [read post]
16 May 2022, 12:47 pm
In Apex Oil Co. v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 10:55 am
In Apex Oil Co. v. [read post]
12 May 2022, 10:17 am
Haaland (Indian Gaming Regulatory Act) Meeks v. [read post]
4 May 2022, 10:27 am
Supreme Court cases, Moe v. [read post]
2 May 2022, 9:32 am
BAAQMD states its new climate change thresholds follow an approach endorsed by the Supreme Court in Center for Biological Diversity v. [read post]
2 May 2022, 7:09 am
A Ninth Circuit ruling last week in a case involving bear baiting, Safari Club v. [read post]
29 Apr 2022, 1:51 pm
Source: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/30/v/70Read More [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 12:50 pm
Dwyer v. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 6:15 pm
Thomas posited that without such a showing, investigations could easily become “fishing expedition[s]. [read post]
26 Apr 2022, 1:34 pm
In a December case, United States v. [read post]
17 Apr 2022, 3:58 pm
Inc. v. [read post]