Search for: "Golden v. State" Results 521 - 540 of 1,887
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Mar 2018, 11:04 am by Dennis Crouch
(Arti Rai, Todd Rakoff, Kali Murray, Scott Kieff)  Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 9:06 am by Hanni Fakhoury
With more than 38-million people and some of the largest technology companies in the world calling California home, the Golden State should be a leader in safeguarding electronic privacy. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 8:14 am by WSLL
AND LUCY PATTEN DAVIS FOUNDATION AND AMY DAVIS, Individually v. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 6:17 am
Golden delivered the decision.C.J. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 2:33 am
Golden delivered the decision.Link: [tinyurl.com] . [read post]
19 May 2010, 10:39 am by Meg Martin
Golden delivered the decision.Link: http://tinyurl.com/2ewq5st . [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 4:55 am by Ben
Judge Kevin Aalto identified five factors to be looked at:- the plaintiff must have a bona fide case- another party must have information pertinent to the case (eg personal details of subscribers)- a court order is the only reasonable way of obtaining this information- that fairness requires the information to be provided before thr trial- any order will not cause undue delay, inconvenience or expense to the third party or othersThere is also a comprehensive review of Canadian case law;… [read post]
12 Jul 2013, 12:19 pm by Greg Mersol
  Certification, once a foregone conclusion in the Golden State, was now becoming the exception rather than the rule. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 2:33 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Wortman states in his February 17, 2012 affidavit that "I am entitled to the quantum meruit  value of my services In the Cheng v. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 1:20 pm by Kaleb N. Berhe
” Takeaway While this case symbolizes a rare “win” for employers in the Golden State, its applicability is likely limited to handwritten signatures. [read post]
25 Sep 2007, 3:16 am
PUBLIC UTILITY DIST. 1, ET AL.The motion of Golden State Water Company for disqualificationof counsel in No. 06-1457 is denied. [read post]