Search for: "Joaquin v. Joaquin" Results 1 - 20 of 211
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Mar 2013, 9:47 am
Meanwhile, please pray for the good folk in San Joaquin. [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 1:35 pm by WIMS
The separate, concurring in part and dissenting in part, opinion indicated, "Though I agree with the majority opinion that § 209(e)(1) of the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. § 7410 et seq., does not preempt Rule 9510 promulgated by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (District), I respectfully dissent from Parts IV and V. [read post]
7 May 2009, 12:10 am
In Fresno, California, a Superior court judge has issued a tentative ruling in Diocese of San Joaquin v. [read post]
8 Mar 2016, 10:50 am
., Rusty van Rozeboom (the Chancellor of the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin) and your Curmudgeon will be in the courtroom of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Fresno, California, to present oral argument in the case of Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin v. [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 7:27 pm by Jeffrey Lichtman
 If an individual charged with a crime cannot afford an attorney, since 1963 the Supreme Court has ruled that an attorney will be provided to him at no cost (Gideon v. [read post]
29 Mar 2017, 12:56 pm by Stacey Lantagne
In a recent case out of the Eastern District of California, San Joaquin General Hospital v. [read post]
11 Dec 2008, 9:02 pm
To see the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department decisions (including index released on December 11, 2008, click on the links below: Appeals Index followed by Motions Index Decisions Announced by Court on 12-11-08 Joaquin Valenzuela v. [read post]
6 Mar 2009, 11:15 am
EPA's approval of a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) for San Joaquin Valley, California. [read post]
6 Mar 2013, 4:54 pm
It goes back to the Schofield decision to ascertain just what those "neutral principles" are:As the Schofield Court recognized:These neutral principles include First Amendment rights of individuals and corporations (see Citizens United v. [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 7:27 pm by Jeffrey Lichtman
 If an individual charged with a crime cannot afford an attorney, since 1963 the Supreme Court has ruled that an attorney will be provided to him at no cost (Gideon v. [read post]