Ad
related to: anthropoid vs anteroposterior california supreme court docket
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Hill v. California, 401 U.S. 797 (1971) was a U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled against the retroactive application of Chimel v. California. The Court also ruled that evidence from mistaken identity arrests can be admissible as long as other factors support probable cause.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]
A landmark Supreme Court case ruling that Title VII protection applies to gay and transgender people. [52] [53] March for Life Education and Defense Fund v. California. In 2017, the Trump administration issued new HHS rules consistent with the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (2014) and Zubik v.
The Supreme Court of California is the highest and final court of appeals in the courts of the U.S. state of California.It is headquartered in San Francisco at the Earl Warren Building, [1] but it regularly holds sessions in Los Angeles and Sacramento. [2]
Hyatt (short: Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Hyatt or Hyatt III), [1] 587 U.S. 230 (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that unless they consent, states have sovereign immunity from private suits filed against them in the courts of another state. The 5–4 decision overturned precedent set in a 1979 Supreme Court case ...
If less water is available, the Secretary of the Interior must allocate the water according to various formulas (which were the subjects of the court cases) to ensure that each state receives a specified amount, with California receiving an absolute fixed maximum of 4,400,000 acre-feet (5.4 km 3) per year (376 U.S. 342). [2]
California v. Texas, 593 U.S. 659 (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the constitutionality of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), colloquially known as Obamacare. It was the third such challenge to the ACA seen by the Supreme Court since its enactment.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California canceled the railroad's land patents based upon the actual use and occupation of the Indians since 1855. [66] The Ninth Circuit agreed with the District Court, but cancelled the entirety of the patents at issue. [67] The Supreme Court considered six arguments by the railroad.