Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 4261 - 4280
of 34,248
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Dec 2021, 9:33 am
That statute provides: "A judicial officer shall have the power to impose reasonable monetary sanctions, not to exceed fifteen hundred dollars ($1,500), notwithstanding any other provision of law, payable to the court, for any violation of a lawful court order by a person, done without good cause or substantial justification This power shall not apply to advocacy of counsel before the court. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 2:44 pm
Supreme Court decision allowing Texas’s ban on most abortion services to remain in place, and largely endorsing Texas’s scheme to insulate its law from the fundamental protections of Roe v. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 12:26 pm
If we accept the state’s argument that it’s an excise tax, then it’s probably an unconstitutional one, because it fails to meet the nexus requirements established in cases like Complete Auto Transit v. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 10:00 am
The case is Hall et al. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2021, 7:57 am
Acer decided not to tolerate that type of infringement after all those years, and turned to IP litigation boutiques Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey (of Virginia) and TechKnowledge Law Group (of California). [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 9:01 pm
In the 2000 case of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 8:31 pm
In 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled in Iskanian v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 2:05 pm
By way of background, in 2014, the California Supreme Court held in Iskanian v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 1:31 pm
As a double-insult, 512(f) preempts related state law claims over abusive takedown notices, so it actually leaves victims worse off than if 512(f) didn’t exist by clearing out the field. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 1:02 pm
In 2014, after Concepcion was decided, the California Supreme Court in Iskanian v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 11:50 am
The first to enact an anti-“Big Tech,” anti-Section 230 law was Florida, with Senate Bill 7072. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 10:37 am
McGirt v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 10:36 am
In Torres v. [read post]
15 Dec 2021, 8:45 am
Although HIPAA does not provide a private right of action, the lawsuit alleges negligence, invasion of privacy, and violations of three California state laws: (1) the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, (2) the California Consumer Records Act, and (3) California’s Unfair Competition Law. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 11:20 am
Luis V. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 9:00 am
Digital Sin, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 9:01 pm
The patient, Evan Minton, is transgender, and a hysterectomy was denied after the Catholics found out Minton is transgender.Minton sued Dignity Health under California law. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 1:09 pm
Ernst, Professor of Law, Golden Gate University School of Law. [read post]
12 Dec 2021, 6:19 am
Jackson and United States v. [read post]
10 Dec 2021, 4:42 pm
IndiaSaket v. [read post]
