Search for: "SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL"
Results 7881 - 7900
of 29,241
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2017, 7:40 am
Courts of Appeals for the 4th and 9th Circuits. [read post]
28 Sep 2023, 6:20 am
The Court of Appeals reverses.For many years, the Second Circuit had held that misdemeanor detainees cannot be strip-searched without reasonable suspicion that they pose a threat to someone. [read post]
23 Apr 2023, 2:42 pm
Gardner, 929 F. 3d 922 – Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 2019 Federal courts are not to second guess a state court’s constitutional decisions in ongoing divorce proceedings. [read post]
26 Feb 2013, 10:38 am
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision in the SEC v. [read post]
26 May 2017, 11:59 am
An ex-wife secured an important victory in the Fourth District Court of Appeal, with that court ruling that she could pursue the ex-husband’s insurance assets and homestead property if she could establish that the ex-husband engaged in fraud. [read post]
3 Oct 2008, 2:38 am
One of the questions of first impression for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was "whether violation of a single child support order which covers two children gives rise to one or two violations of 18 USC §228. [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 4:00 am
Dismissed robationary teacher seeks damages for the employer’s alleged fraudulent inducement and breach of contract and for the union’s alleged breach of its duty of fair representation2015 NY Slip Op 06331, Appellate Division, Second DepartmentThe plaintiff [Probationer] commenced an action against the School District and certain named individuals [district defendants] and against the school district’s Teachers Association and New York State… [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 2:15 pm
Doll, 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals No. 20-1784, is available for download from the AIC. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 3:26 pm
District Judge Vaughn R. [read post]
8 Apr 2008, 11:00 am
Pataki, No. 07-2537 In an action involving whether plaintiffs' complaint sufficiently alleged an eminent domain action underlying a city's building project in violation of the Fifth Amendment, grant of defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed over claims that: 1) the district court overlooked substantial and specific allegations that a private developer was the sole beneficiary of the project; and 2) the public uses invoked by defendants were "pretexts"… [read post]
24 Aug 2010, 5:56 am
The district court ruled in ACORN's favor, but the Court of Appeals reverses, and ACORN loses.The case is ACORN v. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 9:58 am
Second, they argue that the district court committed plain error by admitting into evidence a negative evaluation of the plant from before the charged period. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 11:21 pm
(July 27, 2010), the Court of Appeal (Third Appellate District) held that a prevailing defendant could recover fees when it prevailed against a plaintiff asserting claims arising under Labor Code section 226.7 (meal and rest periods). [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 8:17 pm
The fact that QE persuaded Judge Koh to once again deny a permanent injunction, even though the partly-successful appeal made it a rather likely outcome, can hardly be overestimated.But this is just one of numerous Apple-Samsung lawsuits pending worldwide, and not even the only one in the Northern District of California. [read post]
15 Mar 2019, 6:54 am
The Appeal(s) In two (here and here) separate, but nearly identical, opinions by Judge Willamowski, joined by Judges Zimmerman and Shaw, the Third District Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the trial court’s dismissal of claims against all the parties. [read post]
29 Sep 2016, 11:45 am
We won in the district court, and the state appealed, leading Snapchat, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and others to file friend-of-the-court briefs supporting our position. [read post]
9 Dec 2019, 5:00 am
The district court said plaintiff cannot make out a prima facie case, but the Court of Appeals (Kearse, Pooler and Wesley) says the district court got it wrong. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
Jul. 16, 2012), the Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District, Division One) applied the post-Cel-Tech formulation of the "unfair" prong, and held that the trial court had properly sustained the defendant's demurrer to the UCL claim without leave to amend: The Wilsons do not assert on appeal that any of the defendants' actions were "unlawful" or "fraudulent. [read post]
26 May 2020, 4:00 am
"For that reason, said the court, NIFA's action "did not violate the Contracts Clause," and affirmed the judgment of the district court. [read post]
26 May 2020, 12:00 am
"For that reason, said the court, NIFA's action "did not violate the Contracts Clause," and affirmed the judgment of the district court. [read post]
