Search for: "California v. Law" Results 7701 - 7720 of 33,829
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Jan 2010, 2:05 pm by Harvard Law Review
Sachs NOTE Central Bank and Intellectual Property RECENT CASES Constitutional Law - Eighth Amendment - Eastern District of California Holds that Prisoner Release Is Necessary To Remedy Unconstitutional California Prison Conditions - Coleman v. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 1:37 pm by DMLP Staff
NSA and DHS agrees to formally issue a letter to Zazzle and McCall indicating that they were not in violation of any federal law. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 4:54 pm by Shahram Miri
The principal reason for this is because California's intestate succession laws pertain only to married couples and blood relatives. [read post]
18 Dec 2007, 7:47 am
_____________________*   The Court also cites federal law to the same effect -- Broadcort Capital Corp. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2022, 7:01 am by Eric Goldman
§1030 [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030], and California Penal Code §502 [https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml? [read post]
13 Nov 2017, 8:30 am by Eugene Volokh
Becerra, which challenges a California law that (among other things) requires “crisis pregnancy centers” to post signs indicating that the state provides “immediate free or low-cost access” to abortions. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 11:38 am
By Michael Kiely and Phillip Tate The California Supreme Court released its opinion today in California Redevelopment Association v. [read post]
12 Mar 2015, 4:10 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]
As we previously reported, a few cases focused on tracking pixels in emails popped up late last year, based both on the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and the Arizona Law, and a new group of these cases has recently been filed accusing several companies, including Target (Smith v. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 2:01 pm by Kent Scheidegger
§ 1983 challenging Section 647(b) of the California Penal Code, which criminalizes the commercial exchange of sexual activity.The panel first rejected plaintiffs' assertion that Lawrence v. [read post]