Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 6021 - 6040
of 33,829
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Sep 2020, 7:46 am
Background On AB 5 AB 5, which took effect on January 1, 2020, codified the ABC Test for employee status adopted in the California Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 7:09 am
Miyoko’s Kitchen v. [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 7:01 am
As we explained here, AB5 codified and expanded the “ABC” test adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2020, 5:18 am
Briefly: In Slate, John Aloysius Cogan Jr. weighs in on California v. [read post]
7 Sep 2020, 3:00 pm
’ ” ’ ” (Pavlovich v. [read post]
7 Sep 2020, 2:06 pm
The first five of these lawsuits – against the boards of Oracle (about which refer here), Facebook (here), Qualcomm (here), NortonLifeLock (here), and The Gap (here)– all were filed by the same law firm and all involved California-based companies. [read post]
7 Sep 2020, 4:05 am
Flake, Interactive Religious Accommodations, 71 Alabama Law Review 67-114 (2019).Robin Fretwell Wilson, Common Ground Lawmaking: Lessons for Peaceful Coexistence from Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Utah Compromise, 51 Connecticut Law Review 483-574 (2019).Kermit V. [read post]
6 Sep 2020, 11:23 am
The concern over bias, however, has shaped California law in ways that affect real estate investors. [read post]
5 Sep 2020, 12:36 am
As for the legal standard for tying, Epic refers to the Ninth Circuit's 2008 Cascade Health Sols. v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 4:35 pm
Martis Camp Community Association v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 3:21 pm
§ 1125(a)(1)(A)); (3) the California Unfair Competition Law (Cal. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 2:59 pm
Insurance companies in California offer the opportunity to bind a policy because California law, both by California statute and case law, provides for the creation of a temporary policy under certain circumstances. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 1:08 pm
Fifth Circuit: It is, notwithstanding Justice Alito's suggestion in Reed v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 10:48 am
Last Monday, the California legislature concluded its 2019-2020 legislative session. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 10:21 am
Thus, “Where an advertisement does not incorporate the plaintiff’s trademark, there is no likelihood of confusion as a matter of law” (cites to 1-800 Contacts v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 9:23 am
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 9:23 am
Wade and Planned Parenthood v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 9:03 am
After a nearly two-year wait, in Protecting Our Water and Environmental Resources v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 7:23 am
The NBAM initially covered eight states, but now includes 22 states total: California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 6:31 am
Brownstein, Sabastian V. [read post]
