Search for: "California v. United States" Results 701 - 720 of 12,631
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Feb 2008, 11:07 am
On February 20, 2008, in an 8-1 decision, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Preston v. [read post]
18 Nov 2010, 8:55 am by Badrinath Srinivasan
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had to decide the validity of an arbitration agreement found in a Wireless Service Agreement. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 9:01 pm by Vikram David Amar
Silicon Valley billionaire investor Tim Draper recently unveiled a plan to divide up California into six separate states because, in his view, “California’s diverse population and economies [have] rendered the state nearly ungovernable. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 10:26 am by Patent Arcade Staff
Sega of America Inc et al United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaCase No. [read post]
6 Jul 2013, 5:29 pm by Glotzer & Sweat
 The first case I think is highly relevant is the 1975 California Supreme Court decision of Li v. [read post]
1 Sep 2016, 8:54 am
Constitution's Supremacy Clause, "the laws of the United States . . . shall be the supreme law of the land . . . the law of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. [read post]
24 Jan 2023, 11:02 am by Florian Mueller
The United States Department of Justice has done today what media reports indicated yesterday: the DOJ, together with the attorneys general (AGs) of eight states (in alphabetical order: California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia) filed an antitrust lawsuit over Google's ad tech. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 1:34 pm
She was happy to say: "I, Brianna Bolden-Hardge, vow to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and of the State of California while working in my role as an employee of the State Controller’s Office. [read post]
2 Sep 2024, 10:30 am by Ambrosio Rodriguez
However, states and state agencies (e.g., California, California State Police) are not considered “persons” for the purposes of Section 1983. [read post]