Search for: "Title Land Agency, Inc."
Results 101 - 120
of 347
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Nov 2014, 5:00 am
Lake Eugenie Land & Development, Inc. 14-123Issue: Whether the court of appeals erred in holding – in conflict with the Second, Seventh, Eighth, and D.C. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 4:09 pm
State Bd. of Forestry (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1215, 1219-1220, 1236 [“board abused its discretion when it evaluated and approved the THPs on the basis of a record that lacked information that other agencies had deemed necessary regarding the presence of old-growth dependent species” and CEQA imposed obligations on board to collect such information, without which it could not identify project’s environmental impacts]; Environmental Protection Information Center, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 4:09 pm
State Bd. of Forestry (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1215, 1219-1220, 1236 [“board abused its discretion when it evaluated and approved the THPs on the basis of a record that lacked information that other agencies had deemed necessary regarding the presence of old-growth dependent species” and CEQA imposed obligations on board to collect such information, without which it could not identify project’s environmental impacts]; Environmental Protection Information Center, Inc. v. [read post]
18 May 2016, 4:00 am
That agreement was registered by caveat on title to the land pursuant to the HRA. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 4:38 pm
The developers named as real parties are Solargen Energy, Inc., Solargen Energy DE, PV2 Energy, LLC, PF2 Energy Holdings, LLC, and Nevo Energy, Inc. [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 8:48 pm
" (Mossoff, at 5) (quoting NGS American, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Apr 2022, 9:25 am
This role is referred to as the “lead agency. [read post]
11 Jul 2013, 1:31 pm
Although the latter may be more directly attached to the land, any owner or developer will tell you the practical consequences are the same. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 4:21 pm
By Eric Goldman Network Automation, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Mar 2012, 6:30 pm
The Alberta Court held that the 2007 decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal in Maple Raiders Inc. v Eagle Sheet Metal Inc. had decided the issue. [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 6:44 am
John Fund, Inc. v. [read post]
26 May 2015, 10:41 am
” (Quoting Endangered Habitats League, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2017, 10:41 am
” For its part, the Wireline Competition Bureau reconsidered earlier orders and revoked the Lifeline Broadband Provider designation for nine entities — Spot On Networks LLC, Boomerang Wireless LLC, KonaTel Inc., STS Media, Inc., Applied Research Designs, Inc., Kajeet Inc., Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, LLC, Northland Cable Television, Inc., and Wabash Independent Networks, Inc. [read post]
25 Sep 2013, 8:20 pm
Environmental Protection Agency. [read post]
29 Jan 2012, 1:59 am
This past week, I read Utah's S.B. 34 titled "Production and Sale of Food in Utah Revisions," along with its New Hampshire counterpart, H.B. 1650-FN, called "Commerce in Food in New Hampshire. [read post]
25 Feb 2011, 1:26 pm
Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (2d Cir.)Petition for certiorariBrief in opposition (forthcoming)Petitioners' reply (forthcoming)Amicus brief of Public Citizen, Inc.Amicus brief of the City of Chicago Title: S&M Brands, Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 2:41 pm
The titles of cases issued in the fourth quarter are bolded and referenced by a double asterisk (**). [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 9:34 am
Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) under the categorical exemptions set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 14, sections 15303, subdivision (a), and 15332, and that the “Significant Effects Exception” set forth in section 15300.2, subdivision (c), of the regulations did not operate to remove the project from the scope of those categorical exemptions? [read post]
2 Sep 2011, 5:14 pm
Certiorari stage documents:Opinion below (7th Cir.)Petition for certiorariBrief in oppositionPetitioners' reply Title: DIRECTV, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Aug 2021, 3:27 pm
Supp. 2d 360, 367 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (holding that “little past dealings” precludes a finding of acceptance through a course of conduct) with Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. [read post]
