Search for: "CROSS v. COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA" Results 461 - 480 of 1,764
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
15 Mar 2019, 12:46 pm by Florian Mueller
" Qualcomm complained that using those transcripts would be unfair because "Qualcomm had no opportunity to attend the hearings and cross-examine the witnesses" (unlike at the later stages of the FTC v. [read post]
14 Mar 2019, 12:23 pm by Joy Waltemath
However, in the circuit court’s view, the subgroup majority status rule rested on a fundamental misunderstanding of Yeshiva (University of Southern California v. [read post]
12 Mar 2019, 11:39 am by John Lewis
  For example, in an unpublished opinion, a California appellate court found even a delivery truck driver who did not cross state lines still was subject to the FAA exemption. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
” At The World and Everything in It (podcast), Mary Reichard discusses the oral arguments in Franchise Tax Board of California v. [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 9:55 am by Anthony B. Cavender
 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision to grant a motion for summary judgment disposing of a complaint that the decision of the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to expedite construction of border barriers in the San Diego and Calexico, CA border crossing areas was inconsistent with the Secretary’s powers under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), as well… [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 11:34 am by Schachtman
The Superior Court, Pennsylvania’s intermediate appellate court, reversed and remanded both plaintiffs’ verdicts. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 8:44 am by Florian Mueller
Qualcomm antitrust trial in San Jose (Northern District of California) obviously towers above all other events. [read post]
30 Jan 2019, 11:08 am by Crescent Cheng
Finally, the court followed the California Third District Court of Appeal’s holding in California Forestry Association v. [read post]
18 Jan 2019, 2:56 pm by Eugene Volokh
The claim stemmed from the Times' published statements "questioning the accuracy of a blog post plaintiff wrote for The Times," and the Times' decision not to publish more work from Rall.From yesterday's California Court of Appeal decision in Rall v. [read post]