Cases

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JUAN VILLA RAMIREZ, Defendant and Appellant. S099844 Kern County Superior Court SC076259A August 25, 2022 Justice Corrigan authored the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye a

ORDER G. MURRAY SNOW, District Judge. Cristina Ramirez. (Doc. 24.) The briefing on that Motion has also produced a Motion to Strike. (Doc. 37.) The Court held oral argument on August 13, 2013. For reasons discussed below, the Court grants in part and denies in part both Motions. BACKGROUND1 Ramirez has brought several tort claims ag

RIPPLE, Circuit Judge. Junior H. De La Cruz-Feliciano (“De La Cruz”) and Sandri Rijo were charged with, and convicted of, conspiring to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms of cocaine and aiding and abetting others to do the same. They now appeal their convictions, alleging various procedural and evidentiary errors. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm

397 F.Supp.2d 1208 (2005) Raul RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Defendants. No. CV 04-6102GAFFMOX. United States District Court, C.D. California. October 25, 2005. *1209 *1210 *1211 *1212 Michael Ole

[Re: ECF No. 81] *883AMENDED1 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT LAUREL BEELER, United States Magistrate Judge INTRODUCTION In this civil rights action, Chien Van Bui and Ai Huynh (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), the parents of decedent Vin

Opinion PERLUSS, P. J. After an investigation of a student’s complaint Ari Marken, a mathematics teacher at Santa Monica High School, received a written reprimand from the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (District) for violating the District’s policy prohibiting the sexual harassment of students. Marken had been placed on administrative leave during the month-long investigation, but returned to h

62 Cal.Rptr.3d 527 (2007) 41 Cal.4th 747 161 P.3d 1095 CITY OF SANTA BARBARA et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Santa Barbara County, Respondent; Terral Janeway et al., Real Parties in Interest. No. S141643. Supreme Court of California. July 16, 2007. *528 Stephen P.

Filed 7/3/2012 (see Reporter‟s Note below) PARTIAL PUBLICATION ORDERED BY SUPREME COURT* IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT 420 CAREGIVERS, LLC et al., B230436 Plaintiffs and Respondents, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC

BAXTER, J., Concurring and Dissenting. I concur in the majority opinion insofar as it finds the Court of Appeal erred in assessing plaintiffs’ as-applied challenge to the City and County of San Francisco’s (City) housing replacement fee under a standard of heightened scrutiny. I also agree with much of what the majority says about the test that does apply to this exaction. My objections are that i

1 2026 CO 6 Public Service Company of Colorado d/b/a Xcel Energy, Petitioner/Cross-Respondent v. Outdoor Design Landscaping LLC, Respondent/Cross-Petitioner and Francisco Cuevas, Respondent No. 23SC659 Supreme Court of Colorado January 26, 2026

77 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 713 MISSION OAKS RANCH, LTD., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA et al., Defendants and Respondents. MISSION OAKS RANCH, LTD., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, Defendant and Appellant. Nos. B108463, B111367. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Six. June 18, 19

Opinion STONE (S. J.), P. J. A developer is disgruntled with the findings of a draft environmental impact report (DEIR) prepared by the consultant the county hires to evaluate the developer’s project proposal. The DEIR explains that unmitigable impacts would result if the project were developed. The developer hires its own consultant who prepares and submits a report to the county which states there are no such

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge: Javier Rodriguez-Soto (Soto) and Jose Francisco-Valencia (Valencia) appeal their convictions for conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute in excess of five kilograms of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Valencia also appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute fifty-four kilograms of a mixture or su

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF REMAND CHARLES F. EICK, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. section 405(g), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs and Defendant’s motions for summary judgment are denied, and this matter is remanded for further administrative action consistent with this Opinion. PROCEEDINGS On August 31, 2016, Plainti

OPINION LOPEZ, Judge. Defendant, Alfredo Balderrama Ramirez, appeals the verdict of a Dona Ana County jury finding him guilty of two counts of second degree murder. Section 40A-2-1B, N.M.S.A.1953 (2d Repl. Vol. 6, 1972). We affirm. The defendant asserts four points on appeal : lack of jurisdiction; error in the exclusion of tests conducte

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND ■ DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS Dale A. Drozd, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter came before the court on December 6,. 2016, for hearing of defendants’ motions to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. Nos. 76, 78.) Attorney Michael Haddad appeared on behalf of plaintiff Lucy Atayde, successor in interest of dec

28 Cal.3d 402 (1980) 619 P.2d 399 169 Cal. Rptr. 206 GLENN D. RAMIREZ, Petitioner, v. THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent. Docket No. S.F. 24117. Supreme Court of California. November 10, 1980. *404 COUNSEL Glenn D. Ramirez, in pro. per., for Petitioner. Herbert M.

MEMORANDUM **. Simon Alarcon Velazquez and Maria de la Concepcion Gallo Altamirano, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings. See Ra

672 F.Supp.2d 1378 (2010) In re: AIR CRASH AT MADRID, SPAIN, ON AUGUST 20, 2008. MDL No. 2135. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. February 12, 2010. Before ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., Acting Chairman, JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman,[*] KATHRYN H. VRATIL, DAVID R. HANSEN,[*] W. ROYAL FURGESON, JR., FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. and DAVID G. TRAG

Concurrence by Judge Owens WARDLAW, Circuit Judge: *485It is no hyperbole to say that Dulce Garcia embodies the American dream. Born into poverty, Garcia and her parents shared a San Diego house with other families to save money on rent; she was even homeless for a time as a child. But she studied hard and excelled academical