Search for: "In re Tobacco Cases II"
Results 261 - 280
of 342
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Oct 2010, 5:02 pm
One could only imagine the hue and cry if a scholarly conference had been funded by an organization that had in turn been set up by, say, the tobacco industry. [read post]
23 Apr 2012, 5:36 am
Jessica Litman: goal is to improve results in real cases/prevent bad cases from being filed. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 10:20 am
[II.] [read post]
4 May 2011, 4:42 am
Why would that matter for the merits of particular cases? [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 2:59 am
What we discovered is that this was not the case. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 8:39 am
(See Docket No. 85.)While only the named plaintiff in a UCL class action based on fraudulent conduct must demonstrate reliance and causation, In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th at 321, plaintiff's unique susceptibility to a challenge based on her standing to pursue a UCL claim is fatal. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 5:14 am
Hewlett-Packard Co. v Acceleron LLC (Inventive Step) (IP Spotlight) District Court S D California.: Evidence relating to re-examination proceedings excluded from trial: Presidio Components Inc., v. [read post]
4 May 2010, 5:00 am
Fenrich: You're referring to the 1978 amendments? [read post]
23 Jul 2021, 11:20 am
The asbestos litigation existed as isolated as sporadic worker compensation claims before World War II, and after the war, well into the 1970s. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 5:59 am
California – The Coliseum Case is the Latest Embarrassment for D.A. [read post]
10 Feb 2008, 4:39 pm
We're not getting much of a bang for these big bucks. [read post]
12 Apr 2020, 5:20 pm
Imperial Tobacco Ltd. [read post]
30 Apr 2018, 11:01 am
If you’re not automatically referred to one by your OB, you may want to ask if referral to an MFM is appropriate for your pregnancy. [read post]
14 May 2012, 2:27 am
In case you need reminding ... [read post]
29 Nov 2023, 10:46 am
* * * II. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 5:00 am
Justice Moreno: You’re not seeking the full amount of out-of-pocket loss? [read post]
30 Jan 2007, 9:00 pm
Even with his more complex case, O.J. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 7:20 am
Should these taxes be evaluated under strict scrutiny, on the theory that (at least in the case of taxes on erotic expression) they're content-discriminatory on their face and any content-neutral justifications are irrelevant? [read post]
3 Dec 2011, 9:56 am
Marshall does not supply rule of decision in present proceeding -- Bankruptcy Court may hear FCCPA action, but it cannot enter final judgment without parties' consent, as FCCPA action is non-core proceeding -- Discussion of effect of defendant's admission of jurisdiction -- Even if court were to relieve defendant of its consent to jurisdiction and treat proceeding as non-core proceeding without both parties' consent, court would still hear proceeding -- Exercise of permissive… [read post]
31 Dec 2009, 9:35 am
And no, we don't want to hear about your uncle/neighbor/dad's college roommate who made millions in the 1980s on whiplash cases. [read post]
