Search for: "Strauss v. Horton"
Results 21 - 40
of 60
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Feb 2010, 7:08 pm
The attorney general also reviewed the California Superior Court case of Strauss v. [read post]
7 Feb 2010, 9:00 am
She represented San Francisco in In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (Cal. 2008) and Strauss v. [read post]
4 Feb 2010, 12:27 pm
He was the only Justice of the Court to dissent in Strauss v. [read post]
19 Jan 2010, 12:44 pm
Supreme Court ruling in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
11 Dec 2009, 12:52 am
The Burns plaintiffs claim that in Strauss v. [read post]
20 Nov 2009, 1:28 am
Proponents have opposed CCF's attempts to intervene in both Strauss v. [read post]
5 Nov 2009, 4:19 am
CCF previously sought to intervene in Strauss v. [read post]
18 Sep 2009, 5:13 am
In Strauss v. [read post]
10 Sep 2009, 10:31 am
The plaintiffs' attorney, Waukeen McCoy, represented plaintiffs in the In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757 (Cal. 2008).In Strauss v. [read post]
4 Sep 2009, 11:00 pm
Horton, 46 Cal.4th 364 (2009). [read post]
23 Aug 2009, 8:09 am
Horton, and to not defend it in the federal lawsuit, Perry v. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 5:45 am
Horton. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 5:50 am
It seems unlikely that such oppositions will be filed.CCF previously sought to intervene in Strauss v. [read post]
27 Jul 2009, 8:49 am
07/27/09 The Recorder (source: ADF Alliance Alert):Carlos Moreno stood alone in May when he dissented from the decision upholding Proposition 8 [Strauss v. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 9:22 am
" In Strauss v. [read post]
1 Jul 2009, 5:33 am
In November, ProtectMarriage.com / Yes on 8 opposed Liberty Counsel's motion to intervene on behalf of CCF in Strauss v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 5:30 am
He recommends filing a state court action to challenge the California Supreme Court's holding, under Strauss v. [read post]
12 Jun 2009, 9:40 am
Horton], has no effect on their marriage [Their marriage was licensed before Prop.8's adoption, and the Strauss Court upheld such marriages.] ... [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 2:06 pm
The docket shows that the petition was filed on June 5th.06/09/09 statement from Shannon Minter, legal director, National Center for Lesbian Rights:The document must be titled petition for rehearing because that is the only procedural vehicle for requesting any modification, but we are simply asking the Court to correct a factual error, not to rehear the entire case.06/11/09 The Bay Area Reporter:"It is a very significant mistake," said Minter. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 6:04 am
06/02/09 The California Constitution:Although I continue to update reaction to the Strauss ruling, I want to highlight this post by appellate practitioner Steve Mayer. [read post]
