Search for: "Miller v. State of California" Results 661 - 680 of 1,459
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Apr 2019, 4:16 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
To establish that they were intended third-party beneficiaries, plaintiffs must establish “(1) the existence of a valid and binding contract between other parties, (2) that the contract was intended for his/her benefit and (3) that the benefit to him/her is sufficiently immediate, rather than incidental, to indicate the assumption by the contracting parties of a duty to compensate him if the benefit is lost” (State of California… [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 4:10 pm by INFORRM
The Miller case (1976): The third-party doctrine emerges in this case (United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 6:34 am
District Court for the Southern District of California 2013). [read post]
14 Jul 2014, 1:55 pm by Arthur F. Coon
  For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 3d, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 5:46 pm by Matthew C. Henderson and Arthur F. Coon
For nearly all that time, the firm also has written Miller & Starr, California Real Estate 4th, a 12-volume treatise on California real estate law. [read post]