Search for: "People v. Ventura"
Results 1 - 20
of 95
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2024, 9:24 pm
” Ventura v. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 11:53 am
") Plus the "common sense" exception, which seems equally applicable here.Sometimes people file CEQA actions merely to delay things, even when there's not a high likelihood of success. [read post]
18 Oct 2023, 12:44 pm
Strickland v. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 5:22 am
Appellate Court Case Not Originating with Appeals Board People, The v. [read post]
20 Aug 2023, 5:20 pm
People v. [read post]
16 Aug 2023, 1:14 pm
Not crazy unusual, since Los Angeles is a big county (plus Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo), with lots of different divisions. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 12:56 pm
United States v. [read post]
2 Jul 2023, 1:00 pm
People's Ct. [read post]
25 May 2023, 9:30 am
Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. [read post]
11 May 2023, 2:32 am
”[5] HISTORICAL BACKGROUND An estimated 600,000 artworks were looted from Jewish people during the Nazi era.[6] The New York law defines the Nazi era as between 1933 and 1945, covering coercively exchanged property from the start of Hitler’s rise to power to the end of World War II. [read post]
9 Jan 2023, 4:54 am
In People v. [read post]
22 Nov 2022, 5:01 am
From Day v. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 9:45 am
Ventura v. [read post]
14 Jun 2022, 6:30 am
When Jesse Ventura, the “maverick” governor of Minnesota, proposed the same sensible policy for Minnesota in the 1990s, however, it went nowhere because that state does not have the initiative and referendum. [read post]
20 Jan 2022, 1:16 pm
County of Ventura, today's opinion by Judge Lawrence Vandyke joined by Judge Ryan Nelson: "[T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms," U.S. [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 12:12 pm
We need your vote! [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 12:12 pm
We need your vote! [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
Ruegg & Ellsworth v. [read post]
23 Nov 2021, 12:01 pm
The city has a lot of poor people, whereas the county has a lot of rich people. [read post]
12 Apr 2021, 5:01 am
I assume that the purpose to harm a person's reputation would qualify under the "purpose[] of harming" language; compare People v. [read post]
