Search for: "In the Matter of Estate of Miller" Results 401 - 420 of 890
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Aug 2017, 10:14 am by Arthur F. Coon
  Per the Court: “The purpose of the exhaustion doctrine is to ensure public agencies are given the opportunity to decide matters within their expertise, respond to objections, and correct any errors before the courts intervene. [read post]
21 Aug 2017, 10:14 am by Arthur F. Coon
  Per the Court: “The purpose of the exhaustion doctrine is to ensure public agencies are given the opportunity to decide matters within their expertise, respond to objections, and correct any errors before the courts intervene. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 11:50 am by Wolfgang Demino
"The majority opinion holds as a matter of law that because "only a small portion of the debt" the Attorney Defendants collected via foreclosure was time-barred, their demand letters cannot violate the FDCPA. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 8:52 am by Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
27 Jul 2017, 8:52 am by Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 11:33 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
MILLER, District Judge.Pending before the court is defendant Bank of America, N.A.'s ("BANA") motion to dismiss a suit filed by plaintiff Michael Guerrero (Dkt. 1-1, Ex. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 4:44 pm by Arthur F. Coon
On July 13, 2017, the California Supreme Court rendered a 6-1 decision holding that the San Diego Association of Governments’ (SANDAG) 2011 EIR for its Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) issued pursuant to SB 375 did not violate CEQA “by declining to explicitly engage in an analysis of the consistency of projected 2050 greenhouse gas emissions with the goals in [a 2005] executive order [the “2005 EO”]. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 8:02 am by Jamie Baker
Miller, Self-Defense, Defense of Others, and the State, 80 LAW & CONTEMP. [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 3:22 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  They observe that the decision helpfully reviews the development and significance of the “ministerial/discretionary” distinction, and the “functional test” for distinguishing between the two types of approvals, and that the matter is of considerable public interest because that distinction demarcates which project approvals are, and which are not, subject to CEQA. [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 7:23 am by Kathleen Krafft Miller
She received her law degree from Widener University and regularly advises homeowners and individuals on legal matters ranging from tax assessment appeals to domestic relations matters and estate planning. [read post]
9 Jun 2017, 11:58 am by Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
5 Jun 2017, 1:37 pm by Arthur F. Coon
The Court of Appeal’s Analysis And Decision Reviewing the operative complaint de novo to determine whether it stated facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action on any legal theory, or whether appellants demonstrated a reasonable possibility of amending to do so, the Court of Appeal reversed, holding as a matter of law that res judicata did not apply in this case. [read post]
1 Jun 2017, 3:57 pm by Arthur F. Coon
Further, the action against the District fell within Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5 and would thus have to proceed as an administrative mandamus action challenging the District’s final decision on the Authority to Construct based on the record made in Friends’ administrative appeal and matters judicially noticeable. [read post]
26 May 2017, 1:36 pm by Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
11 May 2017, 8:18 am by Arthur F. Coon
When all was said and done, it was a case of “same wine, different bottle” for Defendant and Appellant San Mateo Community College District (“District”) after the First District Court of Appeal’s published May 5, 2017 decision, following remand from the California Supreme Court, in Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. [read post]
8 May 2017, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Miller & Ors v Ministory of Justice; O’Brien v Ministry of Justice; and Walker v Innospec Ltd & Ors, heard 8-9 Mar 2017. [read post]
5 May 2017, 11:26 am by Aaron Zeamer
He practices in a variety of areas including Business Law and Liquor License matters. [read post]