Search for: "State v. Code" Results 2301 - 2320 of 27,219
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Jan 2014, 9:28 am by Ronald Mann
My preview suggested that Monday’s argument in Law v. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 11:55 am by Hanni Fakhoury
Rubin is not a New Jersey resident and Tidbit's source code is not stored in the state. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 6:00 am
” The visitor was referring to the motion for summary judgment hearing in the sales and use tax refund lawsuit styled Southwestern Bell Yellow Pages, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 8:10 pm by Uthman Law Office
Citing the United States Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 12:28 pm by Richard L. Duquette
  You can peruse the respondants brief below, wherein they agreed with Wooley on appeal - which should result in a reversal of the conviction.IN THESUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, APPELLATE DIVISIONTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,Plaintiff/Respondent,v.ANDREW WOOLLEY, Defendant/Appellant. [read post]
8 Feb 2009, 10:55 am
., that Sick Leave Injury payments are not subject to state and federal income tax in accordance with Internal Revenue Code 104(A)(1) and Dyer v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 6:42 am
California Vehicle Code 23572 states “If any person is convicted of a violation of (the drunk driving laws) and a minor under 14 years of age was a passenger in the vehicle at the time of the offense, the court shall impose the following penalties in addition to any other penalty prescribed”: 1st Offense is 48 [...] [read post]
23 Sep 2010, 11:33 pm by Yasar Saffie
This approach is consistent with the clear intention of Parliament to include the offence of infanticide in the Criminal Code. [read post]
29 Mar 2010, 12:31 pm by Joe Mullin
" The prosecution history of '377 patent is an object lesson in why defendants in infringement suits often express frustration over having to fend off patents that they consider vague, unreasonably broad, or just plain senseless given the state of the art in their industries. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 9:20 am by webmaster
  The hearing also covered rest break issues implicated by Brinkley v. [read post]
7 May 2008, 6:00 am
Judge Velasquez held that waiting time penalties under Labor Code section 203 were recoverable under the UCL as "restitution": In similar fashion to the "additional hour of pay" [in Murphy v. [read post]