Search for: "Arthur Bright"
Results 121 - 140
of 152
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jun 2021, 8:52 am
The law provides salutary “bright line” rules that govern this aspect of CEQA litigation and provide the certainty intended by the Legislature, i.e., the agency’s filing of a facially valid NOD is the statute of limitations trigger; the NOD provides constructive notice to the public and all potential litigants of the parties required to be sued; and potential plaintiffs have the responsibility to check the public record for and to review such notices, and any… [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 9:01 pm
In other news, the ACLU is Looking on the Bright Side During Sunshine Week. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 9:01 pm
In other news, the ACLU is Looking on the Bright Side During Sunshine Week. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 10:22 am
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 3:18 pm
Please contact Arthur F. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 8:59 am
(As legendary capital defender Steve Bright has said, the death penalty is often reserved for the case with the worst lawyer not the worst crime.) [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 12:28 am
Today, a group of over 400 organizations and experts, along with 350,000 individuals, continue to rally in support of the 13 International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance (the Necessary and Proportionate Principles) a year to the day after Edward Snowden first revealed how governments are monitoring individuals on a massive scale. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 3:27 pm
“Tool Without a Handle: Trustworthy Tools” “’What is truth? [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 10:22 am
The Supreme Court has established “bright line” rules that CEQA’s short statutes of limitations for challenging project approvals (30-35 days) are triggered by a public agency’s filing of notices of its CEQA determination or exemption decision that are minimally-sufficient on their face. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 5:24 pm
In a published opinion filed December 17, 2018, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment granting a writ setting aside El Dorado County’s approval of, and related Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for, construction of a Dollar General Store in the “quaint” downtown area of unincorporated Georgetown, a Gold Rush-era “hamlet” designated as a State Historical Landmark. [read post]
9 Apr 2020, 2:11 pm
Conclusion and Implications While the Court of Appeal’s opinion correctly follows settled law, it is nonetheless important both as a reminder of the operation of CEQA’s “bright line” statute of limitations rules, and to clarify the very limited situations in which an NOD or NOE will be deemed “facially invalid” such that its filing will not trigger CEQA’s short statute of limitations periods. [read post]
21 Jul 2008, 2:03 pm
The other members of the group were very bright fellows who went on to prominent professional careers in law firms. [read post]
13 Mar 2012, 2:12 pm
Arthur W. [read post]
31 Dec 2014, 11:27 am
The Pirates of Santa CruzPJ Harvey – AngeleneStevie Nicks – Annabel LeeOf Montreal – Art Snob SolutionsThe Divine Comedy – Arthur C. [read post]
How Has Blockchain Technology Fared in China? –from a case study of LRB to the most recent NFT cases
27 Mar 2023, 9:50 am
” Ming Wu, Conflux’s chief technology officer is optimistic for a bright metaverse future in which many more Chinese companies will integrate with permissionless blockchains. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 10:38 pm
The 'bright lines' requested by the Applicants are simply not possible where a case by case analysis is required. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 4:00 am
Requiring a licensee to acknowledge, for example, that he has an obligation not to represent two clients whose legal interests are directly adverse, even in an unrelated matter, helps ensure that licensee remembers that the bright line rule exists. [read post]
17 Oct 2016, 5:02 pm
UMMP’s argument for a “bright-line” CEQA rule that all enactments of zoning ordinances are discretionary “projects,” based on the above-quoted ambiguous statutory language, failed because § 21080(a) does not stand alone and must be harmonized with the more specific statutory language of § 21065. [read post]
1 Apr 2020, 4:33 pm
In a published opinion filed March 24, 2020, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Division One) reversed a judgment of dismissal with prejudice, entered by the San Diego County Superior Court after sustaining a demurrer without leave on statute of limitations grounds to a group’s action challenging the CEQA review for Caltrans’ Interstate 5 (I-5)/State Route 56 (SR 56) freeway interchange project (the “Project”). [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 11:14 am
In an opinion filed July 16, and belatedly ordered published on August 9, 2018, the First District Court of Appeal (Division 5) affirmed the trial court’s judgment setting aside the City of Fremont’s approvals of a mixed residential/retail project (“Project”) and related Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”), and ordering preparation of an EIR based on the Project’s potentially significant aesthetic and traffic impacts on the Niles historical district. [read post]
