Search for: "State v. Board of Control" Results 1 - 20 of 6,689
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Jul 2016, 6:43 am
In a letter dated July 31, 2015, Gaming Control informed Kane that he had `thirty (30) days to file a written claim with the State Gaming Control Board (Board) for return of the evidence seized in the above-referenced matter [the State Case]. [read post]
9 Mar 2015, 10:41 am by The Federalist Society
 Because a controlling number of the Board’s decisionmakers are active market participants in the occupation the Board regulates, the Court explained, the Board can invoke state-action antitrust immunity only if it was subject to active supervision by the State--and that supervision is lacking here. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 11:43 am by Emily Chan
States can vary among respective requirements of a board of directors but the general idea is the same: there must be a board of directors that serves as the ultimate governing body of the corporation. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 6:32 am
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, LOS ANGELES COUNTY BUSINESS FEDERATION, CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS FEDERATION, and WESTERN GROWERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 6:32 am
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CALIFORNIA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, LOS ANGELES COUNTY BUSINESS FEDERATION, CENTRAL VALLEY BUSINESS FEDERATION, and WESTERN GROWERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs, v. [read post]
5 Jan 2021, 5:19 pm by Kerry Shapiro
On December 18, 2020, the Sacramento County Superior Court prohibited the State Water Resources Control Board (“SWRCB”) from implementing California’s new wetlands and “waters of the state” protection program, and limited SWRCB’s application of the regulatory program to only waters already protected under the federal Clean Water Act. [read post]
10 Aug 2012, 10:48 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Plaintiff argues that his termination from the Michigan Gaming Control Board was retaliatory in violation of his First Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. [read post]