Search for: "REGENT ACQUISITION INC."
Results 21 - 30
of 30
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Mar 2017, 11:54 am
., Inc., in which Gorsuch wrote an opinion overturning a grant of summary judgment against a retaliation plaintiff; Orr v. [read post]
5 Apr 2019, 11:58 am
City and County of San Francisco (Forest City California Residential Development, Inc., et al., Real Parties in Interest) (2019) ___ Cal.App.5th ___. [read post]
27 Mar 2017, 1:53 pm
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 393.) [read post]
9 Oct 2019, 12:59 pm
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 405.) [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:47 pm
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 396; Arviv Enterprises, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Apr 2017, 9:17 am
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 395.) [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 10:09 am
County of Colusa (Adams Group Inc., Real Party in Interest) (3d Dist. 2014) ____ Cal.App.4th ____, Case No. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 4:37 pm
In a lengthy published opinion filed on August 22, 2018, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 4) affirmed the trial court’s judgment rejecting various CEQA challenges to the City of San Francisco’s (“City”) Program EIR analyzing the environmental impacts of its 2009 General Plan Housing Element, which it adopted on June 29, 2011. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 3:36 pm
Huffines, Chairman of the University of Texas Board of Regents; and Lyndon L. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:44 pm
INTRODUCTION On September 28, 2004, the United States Supreme Court granted a property owner’s application for leave from a Connecticut Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of the community’s taking of property with the specified purpose of creating jobs by selling the property to a private industrial user.1 As the petitioner land owners in Kelo express in their brief requesting leave, the critical question for the Court to determine is whether a taking for purely… [read post]
