Search for: "Placer Court"
Results 21 - 40
of 248
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
On appeal before the California Supreme Court the first time, the court remanded the case back to the Court of Appeal for the court to reconsider the case in light of Friends of the Eel River v. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 3:34 pm
County of Placer (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 63 (discussed on the blog here: https://www.ceqadevelopments.com/2022/02/23/third-district-addresses-significant-ceqa-issues-in-mixed-decision-on-placer-countys-eir-for-specific-plan-rezoning-allowing-development-of-martis-valley-timberlands/), Save the El Dorado Canal v. [read post]
23 Aug 2022, 5:00 am
CASES PENDING AT THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT There are no CEQA cases pending at the California Supreme Court. 3. [read post]
14 Aug 2022, 4:00 am
Every week we present the summary of a decision handed down by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and considered to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. [read post]
25 Jul 2022, 11:28 am
Accident on Highway 193 Kills Two Teenagers in Placer County A fatality accident involving two teenagers from Placer County occurred on July 21 in what California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers believe was related to speed. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 3:42 pm
Estate of Graham, Placer County Superior Court, case # SPR0009820. [read post]
3 Jun 2022, 4:11 pm
The Governor also announced his appointment of 11 Superior Court Judges, which include five in Los Angeles County; four in San Diego County; one in Placer County; and one in Orange County. [read post]
27 Apr 2022, 9:07 am
The California Superior Court is the primary court in California. [read post]
14 Apr 2022, 8:46 am
This new emphasis comes from revisions to the CEQA Guidelines (the “Guidelines”), trial court filings, and appellate court decisions. [read post]
23 Feb 2022, 11:28 am
County of Placer, et al. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
The trial court denied the writ petition, and following appeal the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision. [read post]
21 Oct 2021, 4:44 pm
County of Placer (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 577, 592, fn 6; California Clean Energy Committee v. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
The appellate court rejected the assertion. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
The appellate court rejected the assertion. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 11:00 am
County of Placer (Squaw Valley Real Estate, LLC, Real Party in Interest) (2021) ___ Cal.App.5th ___. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 1:01 am
Si vous êtes un ressortissant français vivant en Angleterre et au Pays de Galles (ci-après appelé Angleterre pour la simplicité) et que vous envisagez de déménager en France avec vos enfants suite à une rupture conjugale, vous devrez comprendre les implications et les exigences juridiques de cette décision. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 12:51 am
County of Placer (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 577, held that Petitioner failed to meet its burden of showing compliance with the County’s local procedures which required Petitioners “to show it timely filed a notice of intent to appeal and timely submitted an appeal packet which specifically identified the grounds it raise[d] in this court action. [read post]
7 Jul 2021, 12:51 am
County of Placer (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 577, held that Petitioner failed to meet its burden of showing compliance with the County’s local procedures which required Petitioners “to show it timely filed a notice of intent to appeal and timely submitted an appeal packet which specifically identified the grounds it raise[d] in this court action. [read post]
13 Jun 2021, 4:00 am
Every week we present the summary of a decision handed down by a Québec court provided to us by SOQUIJ and considered to be of interest to our readers throughout Canada. [read post]
3 May 2021, 9:58 am
County of Placer (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 577, 589-592, in what was then an issue of first impression, a party who satisfies section 21177’s express requirements by raising CEQA issues in the first hearing on a project, but who fails to raise the issues in an administrative appeal, fails to satisfy the second, common law exhaustion requirement and therefore cannot raise the issues in a court action. [read post]
