Search for: "P D
v.
Review Board"
Results 61 - 80
of 820
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2023, 6:27 am
Appellate Court Case Not Originating with Appeals Board Quinn v. [read post]
19 Dec 2012, 4:08 pm
Terence M. and Christopher P. [read post]
29 Feb 2008, 4:23 am
LEXIS 14523 (D. [read post]
19 Nov 2019, 12:47 pm
P. 4. [read post]
5 Apr 2017, 2:11 pm
(See, e.g., Board of Pilot Comrs. for the Bays of San Francisco, San Pablo and Suisun v. [read post]
15 Jun 2009, 11:00 pm
Morgan Creek Productions, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
James P. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
James P. [read post]
29 Nov 2022, 4:13 am
P. 26(b)(3)(A); Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1970 Amendment; 8 FED. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 5:28 pm
Hamilton Southside Historic Preservation Association v Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Hamilton, 412 Mont. 519, 531 P.3d 584, 2023 MT 119 (2023) [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 7:06 am
Case Name: Board of Professional Responsibility, Wyoming State Bar v. [read post]
18 Mar 2012, 5:14 pm
Tritek Telecom v. [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 4:34 pm
The people of Sonoma County decided that the oversight of police officers in that county was inadequate, so they passed an initiative that increased the powers of the police review board to investigate officers, review body-worn camera footage, etc. [read post]
24 May 2024, 6:00 am
On article 78 review, the Board's determination to deny ADR generally will not be disturbed if it is based on substantial evidence; that is, if it is rationally supported by the record viewed as a whole (see Kelly, 30 NY3d at 684; Borenstein v NY City Emples. [read post]
24 May 2024, 6:00 am
On article 78 review, the Board's determination to deny ADR generally will not be disturbed if it is based on substantial evidence; that is, if it is rationally supported by the record viewed as a whole (see Kelly, 30 NY3d at 684; Borenstein v NY City Emples. [read post]
11 May 2015, 5:20 am
Sean P. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 3:39 am
P. 26(c), requesting that the Board limit the discovery items to a reasonable number. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 4:00 am
The State then commenced an CPLR Article 78 proceeding seeking review of PERB's determination. [read post]
26 Mar 2021, 12:45 pm
Stark in Stragent, LLC v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 2:07 pm
Several "community groups" filed suit against the Board, claiming that an EA was required because the imported GMO algae would be used in the state-owned facility, and therefore "[p]ropose[d] the use of state or county lands," a triggering event under Haw. [read post]