Search for: "Murphy v. California"
Results 21 - 40
of 572
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jun 2023, 8:13 am
.'” Cites to Murphy v. [read post]
15 May 2023, 9:43 am
California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) or the deferential balancing test used for zoning restrictions under Penn Central Trans. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2023, 4:47 pm
Next natural stop on a tour of serial filers would be California, but cases from California appear so frequently in this blog that I’m going to skip it. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 10:36 am
SAS Inst. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 7:54 am
” Murphy v. [read post]
10 Mar 2023, 7:08 am
Bedoya v. [read post]
3 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
” California – California Business Groups File Lawsuit Seeking to Block New Campaign Finance Law MSN – Theresa Clift (Sacramento Bee) | Published: 2/24/2023 A new lawsuit seeks to block a state law that requires city and county elected officials to recuse themselves from certain decisions that would financially benefit any entity or person that donated over $250 to that official’s campaign in the past year. [read post]
28 Feb 2023, 3:31 pm
Superior Ct. of California for Riverside Cnty., 478 U.S. 1, 8 (1986). [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 7:39 pm
Murphy (2018). [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 7:41 am
Judge Murphy wrote that the 2020 SBM orders should be vacated, leaving 2012 SBM orders in place, as the trial court lacked appropriate jurisdiction under State v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 2:24 pm
The California Court of Appeals, Second District recently affirmed the conviction in a published case, People v. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:18 am
Citing Barrett v. [read post]
11 Nov 2022, 9:19 am
” This requirement is noticeably absent from the UTSA (and as noted above, the pre-MUTSA statute in Massachusetts), and appears to be borrowed from a California statute that similarly requires identification of trade secrets with “reasonable particularity” before discovery can commence in a misappropriation action under its own version of the UTSA. [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:38 am
However, the precise definition of obscenity was unclear, and the Supreme Court would not rule that obscenity was not constitutionally protected speech until Roth v. [read post]
Did The Ninth Circuit Find That Intent Matters In Determining Whether A Partnership Had Been Formed?
14 Oct 2022, 12:15 am
Comm'n v. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 2:52 pm
Trump, California v. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 5:35 am
See Edwards v. [read post]
26 Aug 2022, 4:00 am
White Coats in the State Capital: OB-GYNs become political force in abortion wars Yahoo News – Alice Miranda Ollstein and Megan Messerly (Politico) | Published: 8/22/2022 Physicians, many of whom have never mobilized politically, are banding together in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. [read post]
5 Aug 2022, 4:00 am
Political Influence Operation MSN – Devlin Barrett (Washington Post) | Published: 7/29/2022 Federal authorities charged a Russian man with a years-long malign influence campaign targeting American politics – alleging he used American groups in Florida, Georgia, and California to sow discord and push pro-Russia propaganda. [read post]
