Search for: "Newsom, Inc." Results 161 - 180 of 224
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Sep 2020, 10:48 am by HRWatchdog
AB 2257 (Gonzalez) — Exemptions and Clarifications to AB 5 AB 2257 adds additional clarifications and exemptions to AB 5, a bill passed in 2019 that codified the Supreme Court’s decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 12:26 am by Nassiri Law
Gavin Newsom’s signature – would expand the definition of “independent contractor” to more closely match that which was outlined in last year’s California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. [read post]
30 Jan 2021, 3:31 pm by Josh Blackman
Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 500–501 (1984) (appellate courts have duty of independent review in First Amendment cases). [read post]
20 Sep 2019, 12:00 pm by Anthony Zaller
  California’s AB 5, signed by Governor Newsom on September 18, 2019, codifies the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Sep 2019, 3:57 pm by Bryn Miller
AB 5 is now heading to Governor Newsom, who published an opinion piece in the Sacramento Bee on Labor Day committing to sign the legislation. [read post]
7 Oct 2022, 1:53 pm by Kalvis Golde
DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc. 22-252Issue: Whether, under Erie Railroad Co. v. [read post]
More recently, at the 2020 Abbott & Kindermann, Inc., annual conference, we noted that Governor Newsom was planning to pause a new state law requiring sola [read post]
26 Oct 2022, 6:58 am by INFORRM
In Club Madonna Inc v City of Miami Beach __ F 4th __ (11th Cir; 1 August 2022), Newsom J (concurring) argued that First Amendment doctrine has too many standards, tests, and factors, and called for a “return to first principles”. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 11:41 am by Don Cruse
RICKEY NEWSOME, No. 16-0998 ANADARKO PETROLEUM CORPORATION AND ANADARKO E&P COMPANY, L.P. v. [read post]
28 Aug 2020, 2:47 pm by Jeffrey D. Polsky
Governor Newsom signed AB 51, but as noted above, a federal court deemed it unlawful. [read post]
17 Jan 2020, 12:57 pm by Robert P. Merten III and Mike Le
Since then, the following decisions, rulings, and other notices were issued but uncertainty still abounds: FTB Technical Advice Memorandum No. 200658 (citing Amman & Schmid and holding that while an out-of-state LLC member receiving California-sourced income was subject to state income tax, it was not doing business for California franchise tax purposes).29 FTB Legal Ruling 2014-01 (reversing course, the FTB describes Amman & Schmid as a narrow exception not applicable to LLCs).30 Swart… [read post]