Search for: "In re Tobacco Cases II"
Results 181 - 200
of 342
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Apr 2010, 5:00 am
Enson "UCL Class Certification after In re Tobacco II Cases" by Neal Potischman, Mark Kokanovich and Julie Epley "Kearns v. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 5:00 am
S180179 (request for depublication also denied); and In re Steroid Hormone Cases, no. [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 4:14 pm
See Slip op. at 12-13 (discussing In re Tobacco II). [read post]
21 Apr 2010, 8:05 am
” (In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 318 [].) [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 1:24 pm
" Slip op., at 17, relying on In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 318. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 1:46 pm
Calcagnie received the awards in the category of Appellate Law, for their work in connection with the California Supreme Court ruling In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 311, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 559, 207 P.3d 20. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 12:22 pm
" (In re Tobacco II Cases, supra, at p. 324; Californians for Disability Rights v. [read post]
1 Apr 2010, 5:00 am
Vioxx is one of the nine Court of Appeal cases to date substantively interpreting Tobacco II. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 6:52 am
Effective six months after enactment, all individual and group health plans: must provide dependent coverage for children through age 26; are prohibited from setting lifetime limits on the dollar value of coverage; are prohibited from rescinding coverage except in cases of fraud; and are prohibited from imposing pre-existing condition exclusions on children. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 3:46 am
Following the decertification order, however, the California Supreme Court ordered the appeals court to revisit the issue in light of its intervening decision in In re: Tobacco II, 46 Cal.4th 298 (2009). [read post]
8 Mar 2010, 5:00 am
I'm starting to think that the Supreme Court will need to select a case to take up and elaborate on Tobacco II. [read post]
28 Feb 2010, 11:13 am
In examining In re Tobacco II, the court noted that the tobacco case involved a decades-long campaign of allegedly deceptive and misleading advertising to which nearly everyone was exposed. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 10:47 am
The California Supreme Court granted review and held pending its decision in In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298 (Tobacco II), which concerned standing issues arising from the 2004 amendment to the UCL by Proposition 64. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 10:21 am
Then, the Supreme Court granted review and deferred the matter (grant and hold) in light of In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298 (Tobacco II), pending on the Supreme Court's docket at the time. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 7:54 am
., at 31-32 (citing In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298, 320 (2009)). [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 1:02 pm
DIRECTV, Inc., 178 Cal.App.4th 966 (2009) and In re Vioxx Class Cases, 180 Cal.App.4th 116 (2009). [read post]
8 Feb 2010, 12:46 pm
In Steroid Hormone Product Cases (January 21, 2010), the Court of Appeal (Second Appellate District, Division Four) reversed an order denying class certification and made some statements that seemed to be an implied rebuke of Cohen's treatment of In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298 (Tobacco II). [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 10:15 am
Five others are evidence in pending criminal cases, and 65 have serial numbers cleared by Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for people to claim. [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 7:16 am
There are numerous great articles, including one authored by myself entitled In re Tobacco II Cases almost one year later: A boon for California consumers, or a bust? [read post]
1 Feb 2010, 3:59 am
’” In re Tobacco II, at 311. [read post]
