Search for: "Line v. People"
Results 5521 - 5540
of 13,526
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Jan 2017, 7:05 am
In NFIB v. [read post]
19 Jan 2017, 5:21 am
Judge Rovner, who generally takes a narrower view of Second Amendment protections than does the majority, agreed with the bottom line but wrote separately: To the extent that McDonald v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 1:03 pm
As we have discussed extensively in the past, in a case called People v. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 7:58 am
I haven't seen an amended opinion that's this type of terse:"It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on December 15, 2016, be modified as follows:On page 14, third line of the first full paragraph, after the sentence ending “with the local chief of police,” add as footnote 8 the following footnote:In a petition for rehearing, the People withdrew their concession on this issue and argued, based on In re Guiomar (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 265, and In re C.H.… [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 5:30 am
(Zervos v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 12:00 pm
Supreme Court in Boumediene v. [read post]
17 Jan 2017, 6:11 am
”) Peoples Nat’l Bank v. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 10:10 am
Case citation: Jacobus v. [read post]
14 Jan 2017, 5:10 pm
E.g., Frio v. [read post]
14 Jan 2017, 8:41 am
See Forouzesh v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 3:58 pm
Ziebarth v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 3:58 pm
Ziebarth v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 9:58 am
In Norton v. [read post]
13 Jan 2017, 9:07 am
From his home, he posted the mashup video to the Instagram account with the caption “See you next year, if you’re still alive,” which he claimed was wordplay of a key line from the Evan video. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 6:00 am
Collaboration amongst governments, experts, front-line service providers and the public will be critical to the success of a new system. [read post]
12 Jan 2017, 12:01 am
” Kawananokoa v. [read post]
11 Jan 2017, 7:28 am
There are no bright lines. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:56 am
Resources Code, § 21050 et seq.) to a state agency’s proprietary acts with respect to a state-owned and funded rail line or is CEQA not preempted in such circumstances under the market participant doctrine (see Town of Atherton v. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 6:20 am
Admittedly, the Supreme Court ruled that such sweeping congressional power was permissible in its badly flawed decision in Gonzales v. [read post]
