Search for: "Superior Court v. County of Mendocino"
Results 1 - 20
of 37
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jan 2012, 6:25 am
Superior Court of Los Angeles. [read post]
4 May 2013, 8:03 pm
The Court of Appeal overturned the Superior Court and ruled in favor of the Department. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 8:35 am
Superior Court 210 Cal.App.4th 1006. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 4:41 pm
County of Mendocino,” by Arthur F. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 3:22 pm
In a decision filed December 2, and later ordered published on December 30, 2014, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Mendocino County Superior Court’s judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate challenging a Nonindustrial Timber Management Plan (NTMP) for 615 acres adjacent to Gualala. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 12:48 pm
In a partially published opinion filed June 21, 2016, the Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District reversed in part the Mendocino County Superior Court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging the City of Ukiah’s approvals of a Costco warehouse/gas station project on CEQA and zoning law grounds. [read post]
7 Oct 2013, 2:17 pm
Superior Court 210 Cal.App.4th 1006. [read post]
12 Apr 2012, 10:32 am
Superior Court is out. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 9:00 am
Gwen filed a motion with the appellate court claiming ignorance on her part and incompetence of the Sonoma County Superior Court. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 10:35 pm
Mendocino County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 564, 568.) [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 9:52 am
Superior Court of Mendocino County (1903) 140 Cal. 476, 484-485.) [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 9:52 am
Superior Court of Mendocino County (1903) 140 Cal. 476, 484-485.) [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
The Policy established a number of principles to limit surface water diversions and maintain instream flows in coastal streams in Marin and Sonoma Counties, and parts of Mendocino, Humboldt and Napa Counties, in order to protect native fish populations and habitat. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
The Policy established a number of principles to limit surface water diversions and maintain instream flows in coastal streams in Marin and Sonoma Counties, and parts of Mendocino, Humboldt and Napa Counties, in order to protect native fish populations and habitat. [read post]
7 Feb 2018, 4:47 am
In one example, California Growers Association, a nonprofit, mutual benefit corporation, has filed a lawsuit in Sacramento County Superior Court against the state’s agriculture department, challenging the lack of such a stipulation. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 3:42 pm
Mendocino County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 564; McAllister v. [read post]
1 Nov 2013, 3:25 pm
Superior Court of Stanislaus County, et al. (5th Dist. 2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 889.) [read post]
13 Mar 2019, 2:32 pm
Mendocino County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 564 and McAllister v. [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 4:04 pm
(A139222; 230 Cal.App.4th 85; Marin County Superior Court; CV1103591, CV1103605.) [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 3:13 pm
County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, allegations of improper “deferral” – whether of analysis of potential impacts or feasible mitigation measures – have been a staple of CEQA litigation. [read post]
