Search for: "Los Angeles v. Los Angeles C. F. C. Dist."
Results 41 - 60
of 76
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Feb 2015, 10:50 am
” (§15168(c).) [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 1:28 pm
City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Winter v. [read post]
15 Jul 2014, 3:19 pm
City of Los Angeles (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1385, 1398.) [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 9:34 am
City of Los Angeles (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1385), or is the agency’s decision subject to a threshold determination whether the modification of the project constitutes a “new project altogether,” as a matter of law (Save Our Neighborhood v. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm
City of Los Angeles (2007) 153 Cal.App.4th 1385), or is the agency’s decision subject to a threshold determination whether the modification of the project constitutes a “new project altogether,” as a matter of law (Save Our Neighborhood v. [read post]
Appellate Court Shuts Out Trial Court in CEQA/ESA Double Header under Deferential Standard of Review
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
The EIR related to general planning and conservation steps resulting from Los Angeles County’s prior approval of a 12,000 acre specific plan and neighboring 1500 acre conservation area in Ventura County. [read post]
14 Mar 2014, 2:18 pm
City of Los Angeles (2nd Dist. 2014) __ Cal.App.4th ___, Case No. [read post]
3 Jan 2014, 2:11 pm
City of Los Angeles (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 455, 462-464, 475.) [read post]
9 Jul 2013, 1:20 pm
Ct., Los Angeles County, Cent. [read post]
9 Jan 2013, 4:00 am
We were sad to learn of the passing of Los Angeles television personality Huell Howser. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 1:21 pm
Water Management Dist. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 1:14 pm
Water Management Dist. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
City of Los Angeles (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 259, 272 — for the first time at oral argument; the quoted language explained that requiring EIRs for ministerial actions would be a wasteful gesture where the agency did not possess enough discretion to deny or modify the project based on environmental concerns raised by the EIR. [read post]
8 Nov 2012, 9:51 am
City of Los Angeles (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 259, 272 — for the first time at oral argument; the quoted language explained that requiring EIRs for ministerial actions would be a wasteful gesture where the agency did not possess enough discretion to deny or modify the project based on environmental concerns raised by the EIR. [read post]
15 Oct 2012, 6:26 am
In Lavan v. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 6:00 am
See Los Angeles Mem'l Coliseum Comm'n v. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 7:30 am
A controlled substance named or described in s. 893.03(1)(a), (1)(b), (1)(d), (2)(a), (2)(b), or (2)(c) 4., commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084 [read post]
23 May 2012, 3:18 pm
Dist., 570 F.3d 1210, 2009.) [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 7:43 am
Simes, Levin Simes Kaiser & Gornick LLP, San Francisco Will Jay Pirkey, Los Angeles City Attorney's Office, Los Angeles (Los Angeles Department of Water and Power);William J. [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 8:03 am
Shalala, 112 F.3d 151, 154-55 (4th Cir. 1997); Denekas v. [read post]
