Search for: "Bear v. State" Results 5121 - 5140 of 14,555
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Aug 2017, 9:17 am by Whitney Hodges
” Justice Carol Corrigan dissented, stating that finding “a law of general application” like CEQA to “be considered a ‘regulation’ of private activity, but not of public activity in the same sphere, appears to be unsupported by precedent” and it unfairly “forces the state to undertake a burden no private railroad owner must bear. [read post]
22 Aug 2017, 9:17 am by Whitney Hodges
” Justice Carol Corrigan dissented, stating that finding “a law of general application” like CEQA to “be considered a ‘regulation’ of private activity, but not of public activity in the same sphere, appears to be unsupported by precedent” and it unfairly “forces the state to undertake a burden no private railroad owner must bear. [read post]
18 Aug 2017, 3:31 am by Jelle Hoekstra
In this respect the respondents submitted two questions of law and requested that if neither the case was remitted to the Opposition Division, nor the requested corrections were allowed, they be referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal.The following document, related to inventive step over the combination of the teachings of documents D1 and D2, was also submitted:R15: Saint Gobain v Fusion Provida Ltd, Case No: A3/2004/2441.VI. [read post]
17 Aug 2017, 6:17 pm by Inside Privacy
Al Kassar, 660 F.3d 108, 118 (2d Cir. 2011). [4] United States v. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 7:48 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
As you said in the lead in to this, he's been the head since its inception and he really has taken the state a long distance. [read post]
15 Aug 2017, 4:00 am by Jeff Welty
The recent South Carolina case that bears on this issue is Doe v. [read post]