Search for: "Miller v. State of California" Results 101 - 120 of 1,364
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Mar 2007, 10:00 pm
In what one of our colleagues called a "billion dollar roll of the dice," review was granted in Miller v. [read post]
19 Aug 2022, 3:20 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 3d, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
12 Feb 2013, 6:27 pm by Rumpole
 And so it has come to pass that a young assistant state attorney, who frequented an aforementioned establishment,  ( one would expect in an attempt to satisfy some prurient interest, see, e.g, Miller v. [read post]
25 Aug 2022, 11:34 am by Arthur F. Coon
At its weekly conference held on August 24, 2022, the California Supreme Court acted to modify its recent majority opinion in County of Butte v. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 7:16 am by Amy Howe
Louisiana, holding that Miller v. [read post]
21 May 2019, 9:08 am by Arthur F. Coon
On May 15, 2019, the California Supreme Court announced it would hear oral argument in Union of Medical Marijuana Patients v. [read post]
8 Oct 2024, 9:22 am by Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 5:30 am by Ray Dowd
Television Series, Preemption of Implied In Fact Contract To Sell an Idea, Pitching an Idea, Choice of Law, Conflicts of Law Forest Park Pictures v. [read post]
18 Jun 2015, 12:58 pm by Bryan W. Wenter and Ronny Clausner
In essence, the CBIA’s challenge was based on the “unconstitutional conditions” doctrine from the Supreme Court of the United States’ Nollan v California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. [read post]
2 Jul 2024, 7:41 am by Eugene Volokh
To be obscenity, a work must satisfy all three of the following elements, largely drawn from Miller v. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 3:01 pm
Further details regarding The People of the State of California v. [read post]