Search for: "Doe v. Superior Court"
Results 3101 - 3120
of 8,633
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jan 2017, 9:15 am
Hales’s opinion may well be that people who pay him make superior mattresses, but that does not change the reviews, for Lanham Act purposes, from statements of opinion into statements of objectively verifiable fact. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 7:17 am
In Briseno, the Ninth Circuit focused on Rule 23’s text, which does not mention ascertainability, either in Rule 23(a)’s prerequisites to class certification (numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation) or in Rule 23(b)(3)’s list of considerations the court’s findings on predominance and superiority may include. [read post]
6 Jan 2017, 7:17 am
In Briseno, the Ninth Circuit focused on Rule 23’s text, which does not mention ascertainability, either in Rule 23(a)’s prerequisites to class certification (numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation) or in Rule 23(b)(3)’s list of considerations the court’s findings on predominance and superiority may include. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 4:37 pm
Supreme Court issued its opinion in Morrison v National Australia Bank, the lower courts have worked out a host of issues about how Morrison applies in a variety of circumstances. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 3:17 pm
Last month the supreme court decided State v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 3:17 pm
Last month the supreme court decided State v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 2:03 pm
Turner v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 12:40 pm
In both cases, the superior court found the breath test should have been suppressed and reversed, with the Court of Appeals affirming. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 12:40 pm
In both cases, the superior court found the breath test should have been suppressed and reversed, with the Court of Appeals affirming. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 10:00 am
The Superior Court agreed that the agreement was prima facie in restraint of trade but, relying on Tank Lining Corp. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 10:00 am
The Superior Court agreed that the agreement was prima facie in restraint of trade but, relying on Tank Lining Corp. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 7:00 am
Citing Morillion v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 7:00 am
Citing Morillion v. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 12:20 pm
Superior Court, S222732] What does it mean that a California employer is to provide “one’s day rest in seven”? [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 11:04 am
The court of appeals held last month in State v. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 11:04 am
The court of appeals held last month in State v. [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 8:46 am
Facebook (California Superior Court). [read post]
4 Jan 2017, 8:01 am
The court also referenced the Seventh Circuit’s July 2016 decision in Hively v. [read post]
29 Dec 2016, 5:04 pm
Just because you have a divorce, however, does not end the inquiry on whether the particular ruling that has you in a fit itself is directly appealable. [read post]
29 Dec 2016, 7:06 am
The Superior Court cited Eck v. [read post]
