Search for: "State v. Price"
Results 441 - 460
of 11,960
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Sep 2021, 12:13 pm
" True that, I guess.)The Court of Appeal not only affirms, but also drops a footnote: "We assume the trial court and attorney Weisberg have already reported the judicially imposed sanctions to the State Bar of California. [read post]
23 May 2011, 4:47 pm
Harris v. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 8:49 pm
California and United States v. [read post]
13 Feb 2024, 7:35 pm
They pointed to other states that regulate pricing through acts of the legislature, not the courts, and only to regulate certain items. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 7:12 pm
I think this technology makes perfect sense, but at that price it isn't clear that it is worth it. [read post]
25 May 2007, 7:42 am
Static Control Components, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2021, 6:30 am
Coinseed quoted one price to investors, which was not the same as the price quoted to Coinseed by its third-party trading platforms. [read post]
16 Sep 2009, 4:32 am
Thus, Judge Price, writing for a unanimous majority, dismissed the State's petition for discretionary review. [read post]
19 Dec 2009, 2:01 pm
Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court heard argument in the case of Beach Renourishment v. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 5:25 am
In Dank v. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 4:00 am
Harris v. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 1:41 pm
Dugan v. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 4:01 pm
He referred to the speech of Lord Nicholls in Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng [2001] E.M.L.R. 31. [read post]
18 Aug 2015, 5:23 pm
John Fund, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 5:03 am
Certain state antitrust schemes, for example, continue to treat resale price maintenance (RPM) as per se illegal (see, for example, here), a position inconsistent with the federal consumer welfare-centric rule of reason approach (see Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 3:23 am
Dutch tobacco laws only allow for the display of cigar boxes as long as the sole purpose is to show what particular products are sold by a particular reseller, and at what price. [read post]
1 May 2013, 7:29 am
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)The alleged altering and commercial exploitation of a nine-year-old photo of a then-teen with Down Syndrome that went viral on the Internet prompted the 26-year-old man and his parents last week to file an $18 million suit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, according to reports by the Associated Press and the NashvilleCityPaper.com Web site.Holland et al. v. [read post]
17 Mar 2015, 8:53 am
’ ConocoPhillips Co. v. [read post]
25 Mar 2014, 8:57 pm
Nix v. [read post]
19 Jun 2018, 2:00 am
Studebaker Corp. v. [read post]
