Search for: "City of Sacramento v. State of California"
Results 41 - 60
of 250
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Dec 2020, 5:34 am
For example, Colorado, New Jersey, Oregon, the District of Columbia and several cities in California (Emeryville, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, San Mateo, and Santa Rosa) have extended FFCRA-like benefits to larger employers not covered by the federal law. [read post]
3 Dec 2020, 3:00 am
Sacramento v. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 10:01 am
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Sacramento Board of Supervisors has joined many other California locales, including Los Angeles City and County, San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose, in requiring employers to provide covid-related paid sick leave. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
(2) Does the Federal Power Act preempt state court challenges to an environmental impact report prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act in order to comply with the federal water quality certification under the federal Clean Water Act? [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 2:01 pm
City of Sacramento, California v. [read post]
31 Aug 2020, 3:00 am
California et al. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 3:00 am
This case presents the following issue: Is the issuance of a well permit pursuant to state groundwater well-drilling standards a discretionary decision subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. [read post]
25 Jun 2020, 8:52 am
The good news is that the California Legislature is being proactive on this front, too, petitioning the California Supreme Court in Legislature of the State of California v. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am
Lucy, an African American graduate student, enrolled at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, pursuant to a court order in the case of Lucy v. [read post]
7 Apr 2020, 3:00 am
County of Butte v. [read post]
27 Mar 2020, 6:32 pm
State Water Resources (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 342, 359; Bridges v. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 2:54 pm
Environmental Council of Sacramento v. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 12:03 pm
City of Sacramento (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 698. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
CASES PENDING AT THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT There are 2 CEQA case pending at the California Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
CASES PENDING AT THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT There are 2 CEQA case pending at the California Supreme Court. [read post]
3 Jan 2020, 3:29 pm
Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 413, 418; Sacramento Old City Assn. v. [read post]
23 Dec 2019, 1:36 pm
The City of Sacramento received an early Christmas present with the December 18 publication of the Third District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 9:41 am
Seven states including Alaska and several California cities including Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Diego have filed briefs in support of Boise. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 1:12 pm
City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 928, internal quotes omitted), and “[t]he petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate by citation to the record the existence of substantial evidence supporting a fair argument of significant environmental impact. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 8:55 am
Martin on behalf of the California State Association of Counties and 33 cities and counties. [read post]
