<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rehearing Petition Filed in Marriage Cases</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/05/22/rehearing-petition-filed-in-marriage-cases/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/05/22/rehearing-petition-filed-in-marriage-cases/</link>
	<description>Appellate Attorney Greg May on Practice and Developments in the Appellate Courts of California</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:33:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: I Am Not a Lawyer &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Lazy Blogger&#8217;s Link Roundup</title>
		<link>http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/05/22/rehearing-petition-filed-in-marriage-cases/comment-page-1/#comment-2173</link>
		<dc:creator>I Am Not a Lawyer &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Lazy Blogger&#8217;s Link Roundup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 18:05:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calblogofappeal.com/?p=873#comment-2173</guid>
		<description>[...] Greg May says the Prop. 22 people have filed for rehearing in In re Marriage Cases. I&#8217;m not sure I see any motivation for the justices to revisit it, but I am sure the same-sex marriage opponents felt they had to try. In related news, the LA Times found a bare majority in California telling pollsters they&#8217;d vote in favor of this fall&#8217;s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage &#8212; but the outcome isn&#8217;t clear. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Greg May says the Prop. 22 people have filed for rehearing in In re Marriage Cases. I&#8217;m not sure I see any motivation for the justices to revisit it, but I am sure the same-sex marriage opponents felt they had to try. In related news, the LA Times found a bare majority in California telling pollsters they&#8217;d vote in favor of this fall&#8217;s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage &#8212; but the outcome isn&#8217;t clear. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
