Search for: "U. S. v. Starr" Results 1 - 20 of 26
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Jan 2008, 6:00 am
U-Haul Co. of California (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 796, 802 803 [plaintiff alleged he was required to purchase excess fuel when returning rental truck]; Monarch Plumbing Co. v. [read post]
18 May 2007, 6:00 am
U-Haul Co. of California (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 796, 802-803 [plaintiff alleged he was required to purchase excess fuel when returning rental truck]; Monarch Plumbing Co. v. [read post]
4 May 2011, 5:35 am by Susan Brenner
Starr: `mostly’ Starr: `he thought i was kev’ Canady: `U may have to toss yr clothes if they come to question you’ Canady: `Erase yr phone' State v. [read post]
24 Oct 2019, 12:00 am by DONALD SCARINCI
  Based on Clinton’s conflicting testimony regarding Lewinsky, Starr concluded that Clinton had committed perjury. [read post]
28 Mar 2018, 3:48 am by Edith Roberts
” Additional coverage of the cert denial in Starr International Co. v. [read post]
23 Jan 2022, 2:03 pm
Channel Lumber Co. (1997) 51 Cal.App.4th 1447, 1450; 2A Miller & Starr, Cal. [read post]
3 Feb 2016, 7:22 am by David Post
 [There’s another case squarely on point that discredits this idea, too — NBA v. [read post]
24 Jul 2018, 4:39 am by Edith Roberts
At the Penn Journal on Regulation’s Regulatory Review, Sarah Paoletti maintains that “[d]ue to th[is term’s] ruling [in Jennings v. [read post]
5 Oct 2015, 11:11 am by Arthur F. Coon
While Public Resources Code § 21061 – a general definitional statute not cited by OPR in support of its proposal – defines an EIR as “a detailed statement setting forth the matters specified in Sections 21100 and 21100.1[,]” this general reference is of unclear import and per CEQA’s own terms governs “[u]nless the context otherwise requires. [read post]