Search for: "Board of Review v. Second Judicial District Court"
Results 61 - 80
of 862
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jun 2023, 10:53 am
In a March 27, 2023 post found here, we wrote about the Second District Court of Appeal’s (Div. 1) decision concerning the Water Code section 13389 CEQA exemption for Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”) issuance of waste discharge permits, formerly published as Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. [read post]
27 May 2023, 12:23 pm
But the CMA's leadership would like their agency--which the CAT has to overrule fairly often if one considers the deferential standard of review called Judicial Review--to be the world's policeman for major mergers, especially major tech mergers. [read post]
26 May 2023, 2:45 am
A court’s review of a decision of the Commissioner of Human Rights is not whether the court would have reached the same result but was the Commissioner's determination rational in light of the evidence presented A court's review of a college’s or university’s disciplinary action against a student limited to whether it complied with its own rules in the process A public school district is not an… [read post]
26 May 2023, 2:45 am
A court’s review of a decision of the Commissioner of Human Rights is not whether the court would have reached the same result but was the Commissioner's determination rational in light of the evidence presented A court's review of a college’s or university’s disciplinary action against a student limited to whether it complied with its own rules in the process A public school district is not an… [read post]
24 May 2023, 11:02 am
§ 1252(d)(1) for purposes of judicial review. [read post]
16 May 2023, 3:35 pm
" The determination is subject to judicial review. [read post]
15 May 2023, 12:30 pm
” CPI looks to the second situation, contending that the court should find abrogation in PROMESA’s provisions for judicial review, which plainly subject the board to jurisdiction in the U.S. [read post]
15 May 2023, 12:30 pm
” CPI looks to the second situation, contending that the court should find abrogation in PROMESA’s provisions for judicial review, which plainly subject the board to jurisdiction in the U.S. [read post]
1 May 2023, 5:51 am
District Court Hearing in Cawthorne v. [read post]
30 Apr 2023, 4:00 am
Labour Law: Grievances; PrivacyYork Region District School Board v. [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 7:16 pm
The second was to develop some sort of unifying set of normative principles around which risk convergence could be rationalized. [read post]
11 Apr 2023, 8:52 am
In a 72-page published opinion filed March 30, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 4) affirmed in full the trial court’s judgment, which upheld the EIR for the Oakland Waterfront Ballpark District Project (project) with the sole exception of its wind mitigation measure. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 5:45 am
We detail all these judicial opinions below. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 1:43 pm
Finally, the court ruled that Congress violated the separation of powers by shielding ALJs from removal by the SEC without the permission of an external review board, while limiting the president’s power to fire members of that board as well as the agency’s commissioners. [read post]
31 Mar 2023, 2:48 am
The Federal Circuit remanded for the district court to consider whether notice-and-comment procedures are required. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 12:45 pm
On February 27, 2023, the Second District Court of Appeal (Division One) filed its published decision in Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. [read post]
15 Mar 2023, 5:15 am
The district court ruled that 35 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 9:35 am
In a published decision filed February 16, 2023, the Second District Court of Appeal (Division 7) affirmed a judgment denying a CEQA writ petition challenging approval of a single-family home expansion project because the petitioner group failed to exhaust administrative remedies. [read post]
10 Mar 2023, 4:37 pm
In April 2020, a federal district court dismissed Twitter’s First Amendment claim. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 9:51 am
Section 702 opponents, however, generally dismiss both the FISC and what they insist is the truncated, constitutionally deficient judicial review process that Congress provided for Section 702 certifications, which “detail[] the type of information to be collected. [read post]
