Search for: "Akins v. States of California"
Results 41 - 60
of 568
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 May 2016, 9:59 am
(Compare Bowman v. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 10:46 am
In California v. [read post]
11 Sep 2018, 2:22 pm
And reviewed some of the -- get this -- over 250 published opinions in California state and federal court which mention that, yeah, it's definitely a derogatory term. [read post]
22 Jan 2009, 9:00 am
Rojas v. [read post]
26 Jun 2023, 6:08 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Aug 2011, 7:28 am
Lind v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 8:39 am
But there were a few plaintiff-favorable rulings in California state court. [read post]
6 Nov 2007, 9:00 am
More than ten requests for publication were filed in the Brinker case: Cross Country Healthcare, California Employment Law Council, Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo, Paul, Plevin, Sullivan, etc., Akin, Gump, Strauss, etc., Winston & Strawn, McKenna, Long & Aldridge, Sheppard Mullin, Wells Fargo, Proskauer Rose and Manatt Phelps Phillips. [read post]
15 Jan 2007, 4:50 pm
On Tuesday, January 16, the Court will hear argument in No. 05-1429, Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America v. [read post]
25 Jan 2011, 10:06 am
Companies who find themselves on the right side of the "v" in California product liability litigation like federal court. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 1:41 pm
The California Supreme Court relied primarily on two cases in Diaz, United States v. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 9:14 am
I've always found the breadth of California's definition of "burglary" problematic. [read post]
22 Apr 2007, 9:06 pm
The Court will hear argument tomorrow in No. 05-3152, United States v. [read post]
19 Oct 2007, 2:17 am
The dust is starting to settle in the widely publicised case of Bragg v. [read post]
17 Jan 2008, 7:58 am
White and California Democratic Party v. [read post]
9 Nov 2020, 9:00 am
This article is part of a symposium previewing California v. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 3:30 am
” In several states, including California, an insurer cannot deny a claim unless it can demonstrate actual prejudice resulted from delayed notice of a loss.The South Dakota Supreme Court explained the reasoning behind the “notice-prejudice rule” in Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. [read post]
11 Dec 2013, 3:14 am
In Cooper v. [read post]
14 Nov 2007, 3:12 pm
Or, more accurately, my self-assigned mission to read every single one of the opinions published by the California Court of Appeal, California Supreme Court, Ninth Circuit, and U.S. [read post]
3 Jun 2010, 7:54 am
California should be overruled and that states are immune from suit by non-states under the Eleventh Amendment, regardless of whether the claims and remedies sought in those suits coincide with those of state parties. [read post]
