Search for: "Stamps v. Superior Court"
Results 61 - 80
of 171
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 May 2016, 9:01 am
Following the California Court of Appeal’s decision in See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Oct 2012, 4:15 am
Under this act, the judges of the Superior Court annually appointed a member of the bar who had practiced at least five years to represent persons accused of crime. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 9:29 am
Rule 8.100(a)(1) specifies it must be filed in the superior court that issued the judgment or appealable order. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 10:00 am
Superior Court (1978) 21 Cal3d 829, 835; Hill v. [read post]
12 Feb 2012, 9:01 pm
In Ohio, seals are no longer required for a valid deed (except to the extent part of the notary stamp/seal). [read post]
28 Oct 2020, 9:16 am
” Similarly, in DNC v. [read post]
8 Oct 2019, 9:30 am
“Piracy” is not be encouraged and, in some cases, may require vigorous enforcement by courts to stamp it out. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 2:14 pm
The reason for this Suffolk Superior Court appeal is that (d) in this regulation was misinterpreted by the Hearing Officer after it was recklessly misrepresented by the Office of Medicaid. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 4:00 am
This blog post will talk about the other issues in the case.The case is Nagle v. [read post]
15 Mar 2016, 2:14 pm
The reason for this Suffolk Superior Court appeal is that (d) in this regulation was misinterpreted by the Hearing Officer after it was recklessly misrepresented by the Office of Medicaid. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
The Facts in Vance v. [read post]
24 Aug 2006, 12:59 pm
Overstreet had no income or property and subsisted on food stamps; instead, the Court noted that Ms. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 12:30 pm
Superior Court? [read post]
1 May 2010, 6:14 am
Superior Court of California, 464 U.S. 501, 510 (1984). [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 1:13 pm
State v. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 1:13 pm
State v. [read post]
14 Jan 2016, 1:59 pm
The court concluded that the SAC was improperly filed and must be dismissed, emphasizing that any other result would give plaintiff “a rubber stamp to repeatedly amend her complaint, therefore giving her an unfair advantage. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 10:01 am
The Court stressed that its decision in Brewer v. [read post]
26 Dec 2017, 6:18 am
The court will then issue a service packet, complete with a signed and stamped summons. [read post]
14 Jun 2007, 11:37 pm
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit brought some additional clarity to the earmarking defense to preference claims in its decision in Metcalf v. [read post]
