Search for: "Federated etc. Properties v. State of Cal."
Results 61 - 80
of 90
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Dec 2022, 9:52 am
Cal. [read post]
10 Feb 2020, 8:57 am
Cal. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:28 pm
It rejected the Council’s claim that the County improperly piecemealed the CEQA analyses for each amendment, because, as stated in Banning Ranch Conservancy v. [read post]
10 Jan 2010, 4:13 pm
” Comment: Prior to Don’s Building, Texas “trigger” case law was a complete mess, with state and federal courts disputing whether “manifestation” or “exposure” triggers should apply and other courts distinguishing between BI and PD claims. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 4:54 pm
Real Estate Group v. [read post]
8 Feb 2014, 12:18 pm
Copyright: Baker v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 7:16 pm
US, No. 08-1634 In a suit alleging malicious prosecution by the government arising out of the prosecution of plaintiff-federal employee for false reporting, dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is vacated and cause remanded where: 1) the alleged misconduct of government investigators fell outside of the discretionary-function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act; 2) the investigators were federal employees, not contractors; 3) no search, seizure, or arrest… [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:19 pm
State deficiencies in climate litigations and actions of judges Laurent Fonbaustier / Renaud Braillet 165 Part IV: Cities, States and Climate Change: Between Competition, Conflict and Cooperation Global climate governance turning translocal Delphine Misonne 181 America’s Climate Change Policy: Federalism in Action Daniel Esty 193 Local policies on climate change in a centralized State: The Example of France … [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 6:36 am
BANK, N.A., as Trustee, etc., Defendant and Respondent. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 3:13 pm
Superior Court (2014) 59 Cal.4th 1029, 1035-1036; De Vita v. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 3:13 pm
Superior Court (2014) 59 Cal.4th 1029, 1035-1036; De Vita v. [read post]
3 Sep 2024, 3:13 pm
During the leave, an agency may prohibit the employee from entering agency-owned property or facilities and can order the employee to surrender all agency-provided property (office keys, IDs, credit cards, computers, etc.). [read post]
24 Feb 2023, 1:27 pm
LTTB v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 9:17 am
Co., Inc. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 12:17 pm
” (Quoting In re Bay-Delta, etc. (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1161-1162.) [read post]
29 Nov 2011, 1:20 am
Moreover, the Federal Circuit’s decision in Kyocera Wireless v. [read post]
21 Oct 2024, 11:19 am
”28 Subsequently, in McMahon v. [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 10:48 am
During the leave, an agency may prohibit the employee from entering agency-owned property or facilities and can order the employee to surrender all agency-provided property (office keys, IDs, credit cards, computers, etc.). [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 8:03 am
Civil Action No. 09-1931 (RMU), No. 12., 13 United States District Court, District of Columbia. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 9:50 am
(McKenna, 104-105) (quoting Rolex Watch U.S.A. v. [read post]
