Search for: "In the Interest of SB"
Results 1901 - 1920
of 1,929
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Dec 2019, 1:36 pm
The opinion’s most significant CEQA holding was that plaintiff’s challenge to the EIR’s transportation impacts analysis was moot because the applicable law currently in effect at the time of judgment in the appellate court – specifically, Public Resources Code § 20199(b)(2) (enacted as part of SB 743) – provides that auto delays measured by LOS or similar measures shall not be considered significant environmental impacts. [read post]
26 Sep 2019, 12:05 pm
An Overview of CalCIMA’s Current Judicial, Legislative, and Regulatory Activities by Kerry Shapiro, General Counsel to CalCIMA and Chair of JMBM’s Natural Resources and Mining Group andMartin Stratte, Attorney in JMBM’s Government, Land Use, Environment & Energy Group This article was first published in the Summer 2019 issue of The Conveyor, a publication of the California Construction and Industrial Materials Association (CalCIMA), and is published with permission. 2019… [read post]
15 May 2008, 12:18 pm
The full text of SB 276 is copies below. [read post]
25 May 2011, 7:20 am
On May 31, Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire signed legislation (SB 5596) requiring the state Medicaid office to submit a request for a Medicaid block grant waiver by October 1, 2011. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 7:38 am
” While SB 75 was pending, an amendment was introduced (and ultimately passed) to add the Workplace Transparency Act (sometimes below “WTA” or the “Act”). [read post]
26 Sep 2022, 9:00 pm
Criticism of the shadow docket has been made in election disputes, for the “SB 8″ Texas abortion ban, in immigration matters, and in COVID regulation proceedings.The leaked draft opinion in Dobbs, and other leaks about that draft, offer insights into power struggles within the Court. [read post]
13 Dec 2011, 11:02 pm
Arizona Representative Jack Harper has absolutely stumped the panel, as they say. [read post]
23 May 2012, 3:18 pm
Concrete private interest in regulatory enforcement: tradable environmental resource rights as a basis for standing. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 3:00 am
By William W. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 10:55 am
Tell us about your hardship… we’re interested and we’re here to help? [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
The court found that the extensive findings by the City Council show that it considered the General Plan, Community Plan, and the City’s steep hillside development regulations when approving the project, and in doing so balanced the competing interests such that they did not abuse their discretion by finding the project exempt from CEQA. [read post]
7 Jan 2020, 5:39 pm
The court found that the extensive findings by the City Council show that it considered the General Plan, Community Plan, and the City’s steep hillside development regulations when approving the project, and in doing so balanced the competing interests such that they did not abuse their discretion by finding the project exempt from CEQA. [read post]
6 Sep 2021, 5:27 am
Allen, Esq.Kipp & Allen, LLP52 Chestnut StreetRutherford, NJ 07070 Co-Counsel for Interested PartiesIntroductionBefore the court is a motion for summary judgment (the "Motion") filed by Faegre, Drinker, Biddle & Reath, LLP on behalf of Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC d/b/a Wells Fargo Advisors ("Wells Fargo") seeking dismissal of Counts Nine and Ten of the Complaint filed by… [read post]
28 Jan 2007, 1:00 pm
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 30, as introduced, Simitian. [read post]
9 Oct 2018, 11:57 pm
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2018 3rd Quarter CEQA update. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2020 4th Quarter cumulative CEQA update. [read post]
13 Jan 2021, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2020 4th Quarter cumulative CEQA update. [read post]
6 Oct 2020, 3:00 am
Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2020 3rd Quarter cumulative CEQA update. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 11:20 am
Alvaro Fernandez at SharpBrains gives us SB's January Brain Fitness/Training Newsletter. [read post]
20 May 2021, 4:34 pm
AB 1196, introduced by Assemblymember Mike Gipson (D-Carson) on June 4, 2020, prohibits law enforcement agencies from authorizing the use of the carotid restraint and chokeholds. [7] While a number of cities across the state like San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego, had already taken steps to prohibit the use of these techniques, statewide policies regarding neck restraints varied until passage of AB 1196. [8] SB 230, sponsored by Assemblymember Anna Caballero (D-Salinas), was also… [read post]
