Search for: "4th Judicial District Court"
Results 441 - 460
of 1,930
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Apr 2020, 1:11 pm
” (Citing ConocoPhillips, supra, 48 Cal.4th at 32 [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:35 pm
It is limited by impacting judicial precedent and the law of the case doctrine, the interest in efficiency, and the interest in finality. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:35 pm
It is limited by impacting judicial precedent and the law of the case doctrine, the interest in efficiency, and the interest in finality. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 9:23 am
“The Book” is the most widely used and judicially recognized real estate treatise in California and is cited by practicing attorneys and courts throughout the state. [read post]
13 Apr 2020, 2:46 pm
” Accordingly, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court decision, which it pointed out was in line with decisions from the 2nd, 4th, 7th, and 9th Circuits. [read post]
9 Apr 2020, 2:11 pm
On April 2, 2020, the Second Appellate District Court of Appeal (Division 5) filed its published opinion in Coalition for an Equitable Westlake/MacArthur Park v. [read post]
6 Apr 2020, 8:00 am
Crim II, 2018 IL App (4th) 170864-U, ¶ 43. [read post]
2 Apr 2020, 8:10 am
Two sentencing challenges were rejected, and the district court was unan [read post]
1 Apr 2020, 4:33 pm
In a published opinion filed March 24, 2020, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Division One) reversed a judgment of dismissal with prejudice, entered by the San Diego County Superior Court after sustaining a demurrer without leave on statute of limitations grounds to a group’s action challenging the CEQA review for Caltrans’ Interstate 5 (I-5)/State Route 56 (SR 56) freeway interchange project (the “Project”). [read post]
1 Apr 2020, 7:31 am
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit concluded that this provision did not unambiguously waive sovereign immunity. [read post]
27 Mar 2020, 6:32 pm
The Court acknowledged that the exhaustion requirement is “not a matter of judicial discretion, but is a fundamental rule of procedure … binding upon all courts” (Plantier v. [read post]
25 Mar 2020, 10:41 am
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit concluded that because King had not adequately pleaded all the elements of an FTCA claim in district court, that court never had jurisdiction over the claim, and, as a non-merits disposition, the district court’s decision did not trigger the judgment bar. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 4:00 am
See Fireside Bank, 40 Cal.4th at 872. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 12:51 am
Small claims track hearings.All small claims track lists will be vacated until after 4th May, and orders will be sent out accordingly. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 12:03 pm
Like the 6th, 1st, 4th, and 2d, the 3d District has now sought and obtained an extension order:Pursuant to rule 8.66 of the California Rules of Court, due the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has created a public emergency for purposes of rule 8.66, subdivision (a), there is an immediate threat to the orderly operations of the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. [read post]
23 Mar 2020, 10:56 am
Second District Affirms Judgment Denying CCP § 1021.5 Attorneys’ Fees Motion In CEQA Action In an opinion filed February 19, and later ordered published on March 12, 2020, the Second District Court of Appeal (Division 4) affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying a motion made by a neighbor petitioner group under Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5 for $289,544 in attorneys’ fees. [read post]
19 Mar 2020, 6:22 am
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit egregiously failed to apply clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court in Arizona v. [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 6:01 pm
., Defendant.Civil Action No. 3:18-CV-2449-D.United States District Court, N.D. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 2:54 pm
City of Ranch Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 431.) [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 7:12 am
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit egregiously failed to apply clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court in Arizona v. [read post]
