Search for: "The State Bar Court of the State Bar of California"
Results 4241 - 4260
of 11,367
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jul 2011, 2:13 pm
Op. at 6-7 (internal quotes and citations omitted).With this standard in mind, the court determined that “EA’s depiction of [Keller] in ‘NCAA Football’ is not sufficiently transformative to bar his California right of publicity claims as a matter of law. [read post]
9 Jun 2016, 5:51 am
Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 556 (1985), there is no First Amendment right to use content generated and paid for entirely by another for a purpose contrary to the intent of the content’s creation, and barred by state law. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 5:01 am
§ 1252(f)(1) barred this group remedy. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 6:59 am
” Or there could be a “perpetual loop” of “plaintiffs filing their state law consumer protection claims in California state court, defendants removing the case to federal court, and the federal court dismissing the injunctive relief claims for failure to meet Article III’s standing requirements. [read post]
23 Feb 2024, 12:51 pm
Local statutes differ by state, but have similar deadlines. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 10:03 pm
Indeed, no reported California state court decision has endorsed the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning, and we are of the view that California courts “have been clear in their expression that section 16600 represents a strong public policy of the state which should not be diluted by judicial fiat. [read post]
21 Sep 2012, 4:48 am
Fortunately, both the trial court and the appellate court saw fit to dismiss this action as being frivilous. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:00 am
The county is arguing that the state statute simply requires an attorney be licensed to practice law in California courts and that, because he kept his bar license active and was doing some remote contract work in Florida, Marcus meets the threshold. [read post]
13 May 2013, 8:13 am
The court found that plaintiffs pled (2)-(4). [read post]
29 Nov 2010, 7:07 am
Then, without noted dissent, the Court blocked the matching funds provision of state law, thus barring the scheduled payment of subsidies to state candidates who had qualified for public funds because they had agreed to limit the private donations they would accept for their campaigns. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 7:00 am
These bar discipline offices are either part of the state Supreme Court or a state agency that directly reports to the Supreme Court. [read post]
10 Sep 2014, 9:47 pm
Guest post by Jon Rehm of the Nebraska Bar. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 10:19 am
George of the California Supreme Court. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 11:16 am
Cooper-Harris and her spouse Maggie Cooper-Harris got married in California during a brief period in 2008 when same-sex marriage was made legal in the state. [read post]
24 Mar 2014, 12:00 pm
According to California Family Code Section 2040(a), these ATROS restrain both parties from doing the following: 1) Removing their minor children from the state without prior written consent from the other party or an order from the court; 2) Transferring, encumbering, hypothecating, concealing, or in any way disposing of any real or personal property (even separate property) without the other party's written consent or an order from the court. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 10:49 am
Federal Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2018.htmlStand Up For California! [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 10:49 am
Federal Courts Bulletin http://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2018.htmlStand Up For California! [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 7:24 am
District Court Judge Lucy Koh of the United States Federal District Court for the Northern District of California. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 10:12 am
The March edition of Justice Moore's Litigation Update for the State Bar's Litigation Section is now available here. [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 8:21 am
After asking the lower court to send the record in the case – a sure sign that at least one justice is looking at the case closely — today the court granted review to decide whether the disclosures required by the California law violate the First Amendment’s free speech clause; it declined to decide whether the disclosures run afoul of another part of the First Amendment that bars the government from prohibiting the free exercise of religion. [read post]
