Search for: "CALIFORNIA COMPANY v. STATE INDUSTRIAL COURT"
Results 241 - 260
of 2,376
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 May 2008, 1:54 am
The California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, recently decided a case, Everett v. [read post]
19 Nov 2013, 4:29 pm
Furthermore, as noted by the California Supreme Court in Brinker v. [read post]
28 Feb 2013, 6:53 am
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), provides water to residential, industrial, and agricultural customers in Ventura County, California. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 12:04 pm
While the California local government plaintiffs had filed their lawsuit in state court, the industry defendants attempted to remove the case to federal court, hoping for a more favorable judicial reception there. [read post]
21 Nov 2022, 5:09 am
On Sept. 13, California Gov. [read post]
9 Apr 2019, 7:02 am
V. [read post]
2 Jun 2020, 11:12 am
In two companion cases, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided whether a federal district court could properly exercise jurisdiction over climate change suits brought against energy companies by cities and counties in California. [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 1:01 pm
The court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that active supervision was required because the CTTC was industry-controlled.The June 8 decision is Shames v. [read post]
7 Oct 2008, 11:33 pm
Following the Ninth Circuit's decision in United States v. [read post]
22 Aug 2019, 5:19 am
See Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2022, 12:28 pm
The case, Northeast Patients Group et al. v. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 7:19 pm
District Court for the Northern District of California. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 1:26 pm
See United States v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 11:04 am
” The court harkened back to the California case Edwards v. [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 10:57 am
Dow Canada argued that under the “stream-of-commerce plus” test first developed by the Supreme Court in Asahi Metal Industries Co., Ltd. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2008, 11:15 am
See Rhode Island v. [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 6:10 am
The Bright v. 99 Cents Only Stores decision, issued by the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District last November, illustrates a recent wage and hour class action litigation trend against retail employers in California over lack of “suitable seating” for their employees. [read post]
23 Jan 2014, 7:08 am
Citing United States v. [read post]
23 Sep 2019, 11:38 am
As we have previously reported, in April 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a sweeping ruling in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
18 May 2015, 11:10 am
In a recent products liability/workplace injury case, Elsheref v. [read post]
