Search for: "In Re: Amendment of Rule 704 of the Rules of Judicial Administration"
Results 1 - 18
of 18
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 May 2023, 11:54 am
Indeed, the very purpose of section 553(e) is to permit an “interested person” to submit a “petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule. [read post]
25 Mar 2024, 1:15 pm
If you can’t set aside the rule and you’re not a regulated party, how is their injury redressable in this suit and why do they have standing? [read post]
10 Dec 2015, 10:45 am
§ 704 – which experienced speed-readers recognize as a cue to skip to the next page. [read post]
1 May 2010, 7:15 am
However, this may be the first time a class of investor is the apparent target of critical judicial sentiment. [read post]
2 Jan 2022, 4:01 pm
There are, however, several statutory exceptions to that general rule. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 9:48 am
County of Fresno, S219783(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704); Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:04 pm
(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704; Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 10:59 am
County of Fresno, S219783(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704); Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
12 Apr 2023, 5:16 am
The need for something like FISA was made clear as early as 1972, when the Supreme Court ruled in the famous Keith Case that electronic collection in domestic security cases fell within the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement as set forth in Katz v. [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 9:34 am
Petition for review after the Court of Appeal reversed the judgment in an action for writ of administrative mandate. [read post]
10 Jan 2017, 8:56 am
This case presents issues concerning the standard and scope of judicial review under the California Environmental Quality Act. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 10:44 am
Even in the context of fraud (where the opinion put Virginia Board), falsity alone was not determinative:The Court has never endorsed the categorical rule the Government advances: that false statements receive no First Amendment protection. . . . [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 7:32 am
City and County of San Francisco, 14-704, this week’s relist champion, earned its Jackson 5(th) relist. [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 5:28 pm
(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704; Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 1:01 am
(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704; Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 1:01 am
(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704; Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
9 Oct 2018, 11:57 pm
(F066798, 226 Cal.App.4th 704; Fresno County Superior Court; 11CECG00706, 11CECG00709, 11CECG00726.) [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 5:00 pm
., at or in the direction of another, whether or not the actor believes it to be loaded; or (5) Commits a simple assault as defined in subsection a. (1), (2) or (3) of this section upon: (a) Any law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his duties while in uniform or exhibiting evidence of his authority or because of his status as a law enforcement officer; or (b) Any paid or volunteer fireman acting in the performance of his duties while in uniform or otherwise clearly identifiable as… [read post]
