Search for: "Doe v. Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco"
Results 41 - 60
of 129
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Vincent de Fontbrune v. Alan Wofsy, Docket No. 19-16913
5 Oct 2022, 3:00 am
Box 2210 in San Francisco. [read post]
24 Aug 2021, 7:14 am
Superior Court of California, City and County of San Francisco, August 2021).The question presented concerns Section 77z-1(b)(1) of the PSLRA, which provides, "In any private action arising under [the Securities Act of 1933], all discovery and other proceedings shall be stayed during the pendency of any motion to dismiss, unless the court finds, upon the motion of any party, that particularized discovery is necessary to preserve… [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 9:04 am
City and County of San Francisco (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 950: The lead agency correctly applied a Class 3 CEQA exemption to applications for permits to add wireless equipment throughout the City and County of San Francisco. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 11:22 am
City and County of San Francisco (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 321 (“SOMA”) (my 4/5/19 post on which can be found here); (4) Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island v. [read post]
22 Jan 2019, 6:49 am
California Highway Patrol, filed in a California Superior Court in San Francisco, asking a state judge to bar the highway patrol from seizing cash and other properties from employees of a marijuana delivery company based in Hubmolt County to the Los Angeles area last year. [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]
17 Jun 2019, 12:26 am
Los Angeles Superior Court. [read post]
18 Apr 2022, 8:54 am
Superior Court on behalf of California counties in In re Elisa B. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 4:14 pm
City and County of San Francisco (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 893, 910.) [read post]
7 May 2014, 10:10 am
City and County of San Francisco, Case No. 12-15070 (9th Cir. [read post]
3 Jun 2015, 10:12 am
First, County of Santa Clara v. [read post]
24 Nov 2015, 12:03 pm
San Francisco Baykeeper, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2019, 9:04 am
City and County of San Francisco, 545 U. [read post]
9 Jan 2020, 12:03 pm
City & County of San Francisco (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 321. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
In a published opinion filed September 28, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgment denying appellant Living Rivers Council’s (LRC) writ petition challenging the State Water Resources Control Board’s (the “SWRCB” or “Board”) approval of a policy designed to maintain instream flows in coastal streams north of San Francisco. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
In a published opinion filed September 28, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgment denying appellant Living Rivers Council’s (LRC) writ petition challenging the State Water Resources Control Board’s (the “SWRCB” or “Board”) approval of a policy designed to maintain instream flows in coastal streams north of San Francisco. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 11:05 am
Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco, he notes that the court has recognized that the amendment’s purpose “is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials. [read post]
5 Oct 2021, 7:49 am
Superior Court of California, City and County of San Francisco asked the Court to address whether the PSLRA stays discovery in Securities Act cases brought in state court, or only those brought in federal court. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm
City and County of San Francisco (2014) 222 Cal.App.4th 209. [read post]
31 May 2020, 9:56 am
NorCal ACLU filed in Alameda County Superior Court, demanding the release of inmates vulnerable to COVID-19. [read post]
