Search for: "In Re CAL" Results 5261 - 5280 of 5,826
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2007, 10:32 am
Due to the ease and reduced cost of international travel, as well as the speed of modern communications, the world has become smaller. [read post]
7 Dec 2021, 8:44 am by Eugene Volokh
Defendants accused (perhaps wrongly) of serious misconduct Many defendants could be ruined simply by being publicly accused of certain offenses (rape, sexual harassment, embezzlement, fraud, malpractice, and the like)—or can be materially harmed even by being sued for more minor matters, such as in landlords' unlawful detainer actions against tenants. [1] Even if they know they're innocent, they might agree to settle as a means of avoiding the lawsuit even being filed, thus… [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 4:55 am by Susan Brenner
You can, if you’re interested, read more about the various types of juror misconduct in the manual you can find here. [read post]
9 Jan 2016, 1:21 pm by Arthur F. Coon
” (Citing and quoting from In re Bay-Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1163-1166.) [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 11:32 am by Venkat Balasubramani
The Ninth Circuit recently granted re-hearing in the Model Mayhem case, where it originally endorsed a failure to warn theory as not being subject to Section 230. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 2:32 pm by Victor
Dual Income Tax Harvey E Brazer, Federal Income Tax and the Poor: Where Do We Go From Here, The, 57 Cal. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 7:28 am by Eric Goldman
Marketing, L.L.C, 353 P.3d 319, 322 (Cal. 2015) definitively resolved that unjust enrichment is a standalone claim. [read post]
19 Dec 2010, 9:37 pm by cdw
Demetirus Charles Howard, 2010 Cal. [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 8:44 pm by cdw
” [via Tim Cone] Ex parte Carl Brad Ward; (In re: Carl Brad Ward v. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 4:27 pm by INFORRM
Civil Prac & Remedies Code §22.021(2)(B)) extends protection to scholars; whilst the Californian Court of Appeals famously, in O’Grady v Superior Court 44 Cal Rptr 3d 72 (Cal Ct App 2006), interpreted the word ‘periodical’ to find that online journals were protected by state shield laws. [read post]