Search for: "California Supreme Court and Its Judges from 1987 to Present"
Results 1 - 20
of 154
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Sep 2008, 5:46 pm
He also spoke on behalf of the California Supreme Court in December 1996 at its memorial session honoring the late Bernard E. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 7:21 am
The Supreme Court then enumerated six reasons in support of its conclusion before ultimately holding: Taking these considerations together, we reach a conclusion that, in our view, falls well within the confines of (and goes no further than) present well-established law. [read post]
17 Apr 2018, 11:03 pm
California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) and Dolan v. [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]
16 Jul 2015, 5:00 pm
Salerno (1987), holding that a law could only be challenged on its face if "no set of circumstances exists under which the Act would be valid. [read post]
19 Oct 2023, 9:28 am
” In contrast, Judge Stark noted that the district court had focused on PMC’s conduct from 1987 to 1995. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 8:13 am
In his book We The Judges (1956), Justice William O. [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 1:25 pm
California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987),and Dolan v. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 2:34 pm
Generally speaking (though with some potential exceptions), the answer is Oklahoma law, as the California Supreme Court held in McCann v. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 9:01 pm
Last week the Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). [read post]
28 Dec 2021, 5:42 pm
Palmer, the California Supreme Court compared sobriety checkpoints to other administrative inspections, like airport screening searches. [read post]
25 Feb 2019, 9:01 pm
Transportation Agency (1987)), and treat pregnant women more favorably than non-pregnant employees (California Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n v. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 6:39 am
California v. [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]
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]
16 Apr 2010, 12:25 pm
Arguing for the California city and its police department will be Kent L. [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]
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]
23 Mar 2015, 6:06 am
Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit 1987) (suspect who fled unlocked vehicle parked on public road abandoned expectation of privacy); see also Kurtz v. [read post]
10 Dec 2018, 5:22 am
Judge Bybee’s methodical opinion could have used elaboration in one important respect: distinguishing the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. [read post]
