Search for: "Warner v. Superior Court" Results 41 - 60 of 95
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 May 2019, 7:53 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  Even the FTC has accepted that puffery works: C&H Sugar was ordered in 1977 not to call its brand “superior” to or otherwise different from other granulated sugars without substantiation. [read post]
23 Jan 2012, 12:36 pm by Christopher Danzig
Mark Manuel, Complaint for Breach of Contract [Los Angeles Superior Court - PDF] [read post]
12 Dec 2013, 2:55 pm by Gordon Firemark
Blancarte is preparing his appeal to the Superior Court and we will hear more on the plight of the California entertainment lawyer as unlicensed talent agent. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:41 pm
  [T]the FDA-approved labeling did, in fact, indicate that the approved dose of [the drug] was superior. . . . [read post]
29 Aug 2014, 8:04 am by Ben
 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mary Strobel has indicated that she was leaning towards rejecting a motion by Warner, Universal, Sony, Capitol and ABKCO Records to accept the labels' interpretation of the law in jury instructions. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am by Bexis
Superior Court, 79 P.3d 556, 563 (Cal. 2003).Lower California courts, but not the California Supreme Court, have cited Restatement Third §2 with approval. [read post]
24 Aug 2006, 8:25 pm
" Thus,there is "no . . . material issue for the jury to resolve," see Warner-JenkinsonCo., Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 4:06 pm by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts As already mentioned, Nicol J handed down judgment in the case of Depp v NGN [2020] EWHC 2911 (QB)) on 2 November 2020. [read post]