enow.com Web Search

  1. Ads

    related to: ex parte family law california

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Ex parte - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte

    In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.

  3. Mitsuye Endo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsuye_Endo

    As the employment lawsuits against the California State Personnel Board were pending in court, Purcell’s clients were "evacuated" out of Sacramento to incarceration camps. Mitsuye Endo, herself was incarcerated, along with her entire family, first transported to the Sacramento Assembly Center, 10–15 miles outside of Sacramento on May 15, 1942.

  4. Solomon Heydenfeldt - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Heydenfeldt

    Solomon Heydenfeldt (1816 – September 15, 1890) was an American attorney who was an associate justice of the California Supreme Court from 1852 to 1857. [1] [2] He was the second Jewish justice of the court, after Henry A. Lyons, but was the first elected by direct vote of the people.

  5. Writ of mandate (California) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writ_of_mandate_(California)

    The petitioner must arrange for the lodging of the administrative record, and then, depending upon local rules, get the petition onto the court's motion calendar for a hearing and ruling on its merits by way of an ex parte application for an order to show cause or a motion for writ of administrative mandate. The superior court either holds oral ...

  6. Ex parte Endo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Endo

    Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court ex parte decision handed down on December 18, 1944, in which the Court unanimously ruled that the U.S. government could not continue to detain a citizen who was "concededly loyal" to the United States. [1]

  7. Douglas v. California - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_v._California

    The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the California District Court of Appeal. In an opinion by Justice Douglas, expressing the view of six members of the Court, it was held that the denial of counsel under the California rule of procedure stated above violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

  1. Ads

    related to: ex parte family law california