Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The California Supreme Court Historical Society (CSCHS) describes itself as "a non-profit public benefit corporation dedicated to recovering, preserving, and promoting California’s legal and judicial history, with a particular emphasis on the State’s highest court." [1] It is chaired by Patricia Guerrero, the chief justice of California. [2]
In 1927, California Governor C. C. Young appointed McComb a Judge of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, where he served until March 1937. Then, Governor Frank Merriam elevated McComb to the California Court of Appeal for the Second District as an associate justice in Division Two, where he served from March 13, 1937 to January 1956. [6]
In September 1873, he was nominated by the People's Independent Party and elected on October 15, 1873, to the California Supreme Court, where he served from January 1874 to October 1, 1888. [ 20 ] [ 21 ] [ 22 ] McKinstry filled the seat of former Chief Justice Royal Sprague , who died in office, and whose appointed successor, Isaac S. Belcher ...
[7] Some scholars have stated that "most if not all of the [Seven Mountain Mandate] leaders can be found within the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) movement." [9] It has also been described as holding "revelation status" in the NAR. [10] Christianity Today has called the Seven Mountain Mandate an "ideological feature" of the NAR and Independent ...
[7] Black disagreed with the logic in the majority as being contradictory. He argued the opinion enabled the court to nullify the California state law of using illegal evidence based on due process because its application, "shocks the conscience," but then admonishes judges to be impartial and use the society's standards in judgment.
And any laws or court rulings limiting the influence of religion in schools and government — such as the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1962 and 1963 decisions banning mandatory public school prayer and ...
(Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Friday to hear a bid by fuel producers to challenge California's standards for vehicle emissions and electric cars under a federal air pollution law in ...
The court applied similar reasoning to the writ of prohibition the next year. [34] To avoid the obvious implication that nearly all California government agency decisions were now entirely immune from judicial review, the court held in 1939 that the writ of mandate could be used instead for that purpose. [34]