Search for: "Miller v. Superior Court" Results 221 - 240 of 459
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Nov 2015, 5:04 pm by Arthur F. Coon
In a 65-page opinion certified for publication and filed October 22, 2015, the Second Appellate District Court of Appeal affirmed the Los Angeles County Superior Court’s judgment denying writ petitions by the City of Beverly Hills (“City”) and the Beverly Hills Unified School District (“District”). [read post]
4 Nov 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
The unanimous decision by Lady Hale and Lord Reed, R (Miller) v Prime Minister, [2019] UKSC 41 (Miller (No 2)) breaks new and, in my view, shaky constitutional ground. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 3:27 pm by Kent Scheidegger
S. 557, 567 (1995) (expression under the First Amendment); Miller v. [read post]
4 May 2009, 2:05 pm
In the Norfolk County Superior Court case of Commonwealth v. [read post]
16 Jul 2014, 2:53 pm by Kent Scheidegger
  The California Supreme Court has been derelict in its duty to resolve state habeas petitions in a reasonable time by referring them to the superior court where they belong. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 8:23 am by Venkat Balasubramani
The court responds: Nor does [the complaint] allege that the Gawker employees who allegedly posted comments did so within the scope of their employment, which is a required element of a respondeat superior claim in Illinois. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 3:30 am by Eric J. Miller
Miller The Supreme Court has increasingly relied upon the concepts of professionalism and police training when regulating police conduct under the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 11:51 am by Zoe Tillman
In a closely watched case, a District of Columbia Superior Court judge today upheld the convictions of seven men charged in the 1984 murder of Catherine Fuller. [read post]
9 Dec 2014, 7:49 am by Jamie Markham
Superior Court Judges’ Benchbook: Trial in the Defendant’s Absence. [read post]
12 May 2020, 3:14 pm by Patricia Hughes
An Australian law firm’s “Tips and tricks for online hearings” refers to a ruling by the Federal Court of Australia that a case with 50 witnesses that was scheduled for six weeks would proceed virtually, despite the objection of one of the parties (Capic v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited (Adjournment)). [read post]
18 Jan 2021, 7:58 pm by Arthur F. Coon
Superior Court (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 837, and my 8/5/20 and 8/26/20 posts on it can be found here and here. [read post]