Search for: "California Supreme Court and Its Judges from 1987 to Present"
Results 81 - 100
of 156
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Apr 2013, 3:33 pm
Supreme Court heard argument on the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage in California, and then on the legality of the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law prohibiting the payment of federal benefits to spouses in same-sex marriages. While the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and ransgender) movement is gaining force, the fact is that, as of April 11,… [read post]
15 Mar 2013, 4:30 am
Bravo, 43 Cal.3d 600 (California Supreme Court 1987)). [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 8:11 am
(iv) A California-only holding: The Court could hold, as did the court of appeals (see my explanation last year), that where a state has afforded same-sex couples all or virtually all of the incidents of marriage that it offers to similarly situated opposite-sex couples, and where that state has at one point allowed those same-sex couples the right to be married — a set of conditions that presently describes only the state of California… [read post]
24 Jan 2013, 6:16 pm
The only interest that the Administration now has at stake in its appeal, the brief said, is a desire to obtain “a precedent from a higher court. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
In a case notable for its unique conception of “meaningful discretion” for purposes of triggering CEQA review, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has created a split in authority that will undoubtedly require Supreme Court review (or depublication) to resolve. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
In a case notable for its unique conception of “meaningful discretion” for purposes of triggering CEQA review, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has created a split in authority that will undoubtedly require Supreme Court review (or depublication) to resolve. [read post]
9 Oct 2012, 4:30 am
WCAB (Turner), No. 1997 C.D.2011, is being appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the question is not really whether fentanyl is proper, reasonable or necessary, but the standard upon which the underlying court made its factual determination. [read post]
30 Aug 2012, 9:39 pm
” The Supreme Court overturned the injunction on the ground that Lyons had not established a case or controversy. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 6:23 pm
As the Supreme Court explained in Sibron v. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 8:46 am
” From thereon, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court consistently applied § 402A of the Second Restatement, to reach the same conclusions as the Second Restatement, or to decide for itself issues left unsaid by the Second Restatement: Lewis v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 7:30 am
The Judge ruled, "In accordance with Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a Declaratory Judgment shall be entered separately, declaring FLA.STAT. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 12:31 pm
” Interestingly enough, Judge Mayer (a Federal Circuit judge since 1987) joined in this concurring opinion. [read post]
15 Mar 2012, 9:53 am
The present day Mr. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 8:13 am
In his book We The Judges (1956), Justice William O. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 2:49 pm
In addition, district judges are now instructed by the Supreme Court that they should probe into complaints about appointed lawyers. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 3:34 pm
Rptr. 331 (1988), the case involving whether Ballona Lagoon in Southern California was subject to the state's tidelands trust, that eventually ended up in the Supreme Court. [read post]
17 Feb 2012, 9:02 pm
With seven judges dissenting, the Circuit Court refused en banc review. [read post]
17 Dec 2011, 12:27 am
" The chief fact at issue on ECUSA's and its rump diocese's motions was whether or not ECUSA is a "hierarchical" church, i.e., a church in which, as the United States Supreme Court expressed it in its 1872 decision in Watson v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 9:39 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Katz v. [read post]
26 Sep 2011, 3:46 am
Dugard and her daughters already collected $20 million from the State of California for its role; I don’t know if that reflected an assessment of the merits of her claim or a recognition that the social contract required we do what we can for Dugard and her kids. [read post]
