Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 3461 - 3480
of 34,277
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 May 2011, 7:47 am
Brenston v. [read post]
29 Mar 2012, 1:06 pm
On February 29, 2012, the California Supreme Court cleared its docket of two cases in which it had granted review pending Harris.In Pellegrino v. [read post]
21 Jan 2008, 6:08 am
After the California Supreme Court found unconscionable a clause banning class actions in a consumer arbitration contract in Discover Bank v. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 2:37 pm
(This statute followed Martinez v. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 3:39 pm
In the case of Martinez v. [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 12:19 pm
In Morris v. [read post]
16 Feb 2019, 6:52 am
Meanwhile, there in the case of Big Sky Scientific LLC v. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 2:45 pm
‘While California law does permit an employee to seek other employment and even to make some “preparations to compete” before resigning [citation], California law does not authorize an employee to transfer his loyalty to a competitor. [read post]
20 Nov 2010, 8:27 am
Foster-Gardner, Inc. v. [read post]
30 May 2017, 9:00 am
See Sanchez, et al. v. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 12:15 am
He finds support for this proposition in Brehm v. [read post]
16 Nov 2007, 4:00 pm
In Calhoun et al v. [read post]
2 Oct 2010, 12:34 pm
They brought a number of claims including negligence and intentional torts under California and Nigerian law. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 3:50 pm
The Court of Appeal reverses because it concludes that California law should have applied, and is better.There are a couple of other subsidiary holdings that are important as well. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 3:00 pm
Related Cases: Center for Genetics and Society v. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 1:33 pm
But that's exactly what happens here.Admittedly, the opinion by Justice McConnell merely says that the California Supreme Court's decision in Alternative Systems remains good law even after the Court's subsequent decision in Aguilar. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 4:58 pm
The California Supreme Court issued an important decision today clarifying the test to determine whether employees should be treated as exempt from overtime requirements, in Harris v. [read post]
13 Jul 2011, 11:26 am
In Sullivan et al v. [read post]
24 Jul 2017, 6:47 am
Employees have specified rights to rest under California law. [read post]
