Search for: "Housing Authority v. Superior Court" Results 381 - 400 of 972
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Dec 2017, 6:03 pm by Eugene Volokh
Wilmington Housing Authority, by holding that, “[o]n its face, the Delaware provision is intentionally broader than the Second Amendment and protects the right to bear arms outside the home, including for hunting and recreation. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 6:05 am by Joy Waltemath
“A county board of education ‘cannot be held liable for personnel decisions over which it did not retain final review authority; that is, it is not liable for decisions committed to [the superintendent’s] discretion because there is no respondeat superior liability under § 1983,’” explained the court. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 1:36 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
They may be used against you in court to deny your claim. [read post]
2 Nov 2017, 9:01 pm by Neil H. Buchanan
I also noted that the Supreme Court has never accepted the “citizen uprising theory” of the Second Amendment. [read post]
AB 1505 restores the authority of cities and counties to require the inclusion of affordable housing in new rental housing projects, thereby superseding the 2009 decision of Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P., et al. v. [read post]
AB 1505 restores the authority of cities and counties to require the inclusion of affordable housing in new rental housing projects, thereby superseding the 2009 decision of Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P., et al. v. [read post]
9 Oct 2017, 7:28 am by Joy Waltemath
The court also denied the employer’s motion to quash the employee’s subpoena to depose the station’s former in-house counsel, to whom the employee complained of harassment. [read post]
26 Sep 2017, 6:41 am by Dan Carvajal
The central revenue feature of Ohio House Bill 66 of 2005 (which was also the biennial budget), the Commercial Activity Tax was designed to phase in as corporation franchise and tangible personal property taxes phased out. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 3:32 pm by Wolfgang Demino
It is true that Spokeo held that even lawsuits based on statutory violations require proof of a concrete injury and that concreteness is not automatically met by citing a statute that grants a right and authorizes a suit to vindicate that right. 136 S. [read post]
10 Sep 2017, 9:01 pm by Ronald D. Rotunda
Superior Court, which the California Supreme Court decided in 1998. [read post]
30 Aug 2017, 9:01 pm by Brad Miller
The US Supreme Court has spoken directly on this point in Young v. [read post]
7 Aug 2017, 7:42 am
This post examines a recent decision of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania: Commonwealth v. [read post]