Search for: "State of California v. United States"
Results 4341 - 4360
of 13,839
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2012, 2:00 am
Connerly v. [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 12:20 pm
United Parcel Service, Inc. [read post]
28 Sep 2018, 11:58 am
The number of plaintiffs suing Qualcomm in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California has just increased by a factor of roughly a quarter billion--from one (the Federal Trade Commission) to approximately 250 million (the FTC plus all U.S. smartphone purchasers since February 11, 2011)--due to a single court order certifying a class with the following definition:"All natural persons and entities in the United States who… [read post]
21 May 2013, 7:49 am
In Metrish v. [read post]
14 Aug 2013, 6:00 am
The Ninth Circuit opinion in Salameh v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 6:51 pm
Yesterday, as expected, the US District Court for the Northern District of California certified a class of human egg donors in Kamakahi v. [read post]
18 Jun 2009, 2:05 am
United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994). [read post]
12 Nov 2008, 11:44 am
The Ohio Supreme court tackled that issue a year ago in State v. [read post]
16 Apr 2018, 4:21 am
Supreme Court on April 23, representing the United States in a criminal sentencing case. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 4:11 pm
Katz Technology Licensing LP (“Katz”) appeals from final judgments entered by the United States District Court for the Central District of California in a group of consolidated cases. [read post]
21 Feb 2007, 3:04 pm
To us, the decision seemed contrary to the rule stated in Branick. [read post]
23 Mar 2016, 4:23 am
Wright II said the United States is excluded from the operation of such state laws because of its sovereign immunity and ruled that the statutory deadlines are not binding on CMS. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 6:28 am
The Writ seeks reversal of the Ninth Circuit’s decision, PhRMA v. [read post]
7 Feb 2017, 5:00 am
United States, was decided on July 26, 2016. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 8:57 am
A few days ago I noted a recent California Court of Appeal ruling holding that an Internet posting (on a Facebook page, in that instance) that was accessible in California and caused harm to California residents was not a sufficient basis for finding that the defendant was subject to the personal jurisdiction of the California courts. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 10:42 pm
Reminds me of those catchy names plaintiff's groups often use (see, e.g., United States v. [read post]
13 Nov 2009, 10:20 am
PREPARED BY: Michael Chernicoff Looser Rules on Sentencing Stir Concerns About Equity [online.wsj.com] The Supreme Court cases of The United State v. [read post]
9 Jan 2019, 1:54 pm
Today’s lone case for argument, Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 9:23 am
Superior Court of California, Tulare County, et al. [read post]
7 May 2007, 8:22 am
California, which was six-to-three.) [read post]
