Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 2141 - 2160
of 34,273
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Mar 2023, 10:00 am
Moreover, the Ninth Circuit found that under California law, a two-year statute of limitations is considered reasonable. [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 4:05 am
In Dousa v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 3:21 pm
The California Supreme Court is currently considering the same standing issue in Adolph v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 1:05 pm
In 2016, Swarns served as lead counsel for Buck, arguing Buck v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 12:59 pm
She noted that the rule of Griggs v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 12:48 pm
So, pursuant to California law, in 2022 he filed a motion to withdraw his plea, on the theory that he wouldn't have pled guilty if he knew he was subject to being deported as a result.The prosecution didn't oppose his motion, but the trial court denied it anyway. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 11:43 am
E.D. 2011) (holding that Missouri’s public policy overrode California choice of law). [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 11:28 am
Andrade-Heymsfield v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 5:58 am
While there, she gained fame for “saving” Major League Baseball with her strike-ending decision in Silverman v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 5:16 am
The plaintiff in Gonzalez v. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 3:00 am
In Make UC A Good Neighbor v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 9:05 pm
This post comes to us from Yoon-Ho Alex Lee at Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law, Lawrence Liu at the University of Southern California, and Alessandro Romano at Bocconi University – Department of Law. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 1:09 pm
Pacific Palisades Residents Association, Inc. v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 12:58 pm
See Olson v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 3:38 am
" Justice Scalia also dissented in Maryland v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 12:15 am
In that case, O'Handley v. [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 12:12 am
At the first FTC v. [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 8:18 am
But in Merritt v. [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 7:54 am
Mack v. [read post]
20 Mar 2023, 12:15 am
Transcript, Strategic Funding Source Holdings LLC v. [read post]