Search for: "California v. Russell"
Results 341 - 360
of 750
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2015, 2:20 am
” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioners in State Water Contractors v. [read post]
11 Feb 2022, 12:21 pm
Polansky v. [read post]
27 Sep 2014, 12:20 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 May 2019, 9:01 am
The city of Newport Beach, California, had appealed a decision by the U.S. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 3:56 am
” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of respondent Stephens in Harris Funeral Homes v. [read post]
24 May 2019, 3:10 am
” At Justia’s Verdict blog, Vikram David Amar discusses the court’s approach to precedent in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
17 Apr 2017, 4:04 am
After a lunch break, the justices will reconvene to hear argument in California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. [read post]
29 Apr 2016, 5:21 am
California Teachers Association 14-915Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief by the American Federation of Teachers and American Association of University Professors in support of the respondents in this case.Issue: (1) Whether Abood v. [read post]
8 May 2013, 7:22 am
Jeremy Leaming at ACSblog notes that with the Court’s decision in Hollingsworth v. [read post]
3 Aug 2016, 12:18 pm
Abbott, Diane Kindermann, Glen Hansen, Brian Russell and Dan Cucchi Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2016 2nd Quarter CEQA update. [read post]
6 May 2016, 5:20 am
California Teachers Association 14-915Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief by the American Federation of Teachers and American Association of University Professors in support of the respondents in this case.Issue: (1) Whether Abood v. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 3:00 pm
Adame v. [read post]
5 Jan 2011, 6:34 am
Phelps, and Wal-Mart v. [read post]
6 Dec 2008, 1:12 am
Interestingly, although the new right-exclusive remedy rule has been a staple of California jurisprudence for over 150 years (see, e.g., Russell v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 6:19 pm
We have a wealth of varying viewpoints on AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
21 Mar 2018, 3:55 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the respondents in this case.] [read post]
27 Mar 2018, 4:32 am
” At The Progressive, Bill Blum argues that a loss for California in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 11:38 am
" (Disclaimer: Howe & Russell and Akin Gump represent the respondent in this case). [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 3:37 am
Briefly: At Hamilton and Griffin on Rights, Jeffrey Stempel analyzes the Court’s recent ruling in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
17 Jan 2011, 2:57 pm
Barry Russell, Bankruptcy Judge in the Central District of California, and a panel of outstanding bankruptcy professionals. [read post]
