Search for: "Parks v. Superior Court"
Results 841 - 860
of 942
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jun 2009, 3:21 am
Egonu; 2007 CarswellOnt 6282; Ontario Superior Court of Justice; September 18, 2007; Docket: CRIMPJ(P) 1721/07; Subject: Criminal; Criminal law — Trial procedure — Selection of jury — Empanelling jury — Challenge for cause — Grounds. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 6:08 pm
(an ordinance regarding park impact fees). [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 12:00 am
The decision in Flamer v. [read post]
31 May 2009, 2:28 pm
See Schmidt v. [read post]
27 May 2009, 3:18 pm
Based on its extensive analysis of the provisions of a development agreement and the municipal code, the court reversed the Superior Court on the impact fees issue. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 3:51 am
On the other hand, the 8th District is not a superior court to the 8th District; Dudenas is not binding, because you can overrule it. [read post]
28 Mar 2009, 10:50 am
Superior Court (Conners). [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 2:05 am
Superior Court, 920 P.2d 1347, 1350-51 (Cal. 1996); Brown v. [read post]
18 Mar 2009, 3:15 pm
In Asbury Park Press v. [read post]
19 Feb 2009, 7:51 am
Park, 421 US 658 (1975). [read post]
18 Feb 2009, 9:58 am
In Parks v. [read post]
14 Feb 2009, 1:23 am
In City of Stockton v. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 2:06 am
Motors Corp. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2009, 1:00 am
(IP Dragon) Copycats in China: trains, planes and ... automobiles (IP Dragon) Denmark Copenhagen Maritime and Commercial Court rules Innocent Pictures ApS’ use of ‘Tivoli’ and ‘Tivoli Night’ in context of pornographic broadcasts infringes trade mark rights of Danish amusement park TIVOLI A/S (Class 46) Court finds minimal confusion in MINIMAL case (International Law Office) Europe ECJ: Promotional… [read post]
22 Jan 2009, 2:06 am
Specifically as to inadequate warning claims the court in Anderson v. [read post]
18 Jan 2009, 11:16 am
No. 4057 Ontario Superior Court of Justice D. [read post]
9 Jan 2009, 10:34 am
A new case filed this week in SF Superior Court. [read post]
5 Jan 2009, 3:15 am
MooreFederal Appellate Court DecisionsPaul Mollica's Daily Developments in EEO Law here2nd Circuit Carras v. [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 11:07 pm
The superior court found Brendlin had not been seized for purposes of the Fourth Amendment because, up until the time of the arrest, "he was free to leave. [read post]
5 Dec 2008, 5:30 pm
Zalat v. [read post]
