Search for: "The State Bar Court of the State Bar of California" Results 8421 - 8440 of 11,375
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 May 2011, 1:58 pm
" Reversing the 9th Circuit decision Wednesday, the Supreme Court said states cannot enforce such exceptions to federal law favoring arbitration provisions. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 6:32 am by Christopher Brumwell
By a vote of five to four, the Court on Wednesday held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) pre-empts California state law, which deems class arbitration waivers in consumer contracts of adhesion unconscionable in disputes over small amounts of damages. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:20 am by Joel R. Brandes
In the fall of 2008, Brian had an internship position that required him to temporarily reside in California. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 5:24 pm by Lisa McElroy
  With the Court split among traditional ideological lines, a “bare majority” of the Court (or five Justices) decided that, under the Federal Arbitration Act, contracts requiring plaintiffs to waive their rights to form a class in an arbitration proceeding are enforceable, because the federal law “preempted” (or trumped) California state law allowing such actions. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 12:23 pm by Dawn Goulet, Associate
  Although the California Supreme Court noted that its decision in People ex rel. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:35 pm
Applying California law, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the bar on class arbitrations rendered the arbitration agreement unconscionable and unenforceable. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm by Bexis
  But when the California Supreme Court took a look at Kearl and the case-by-case approach to comment k, the court recoiled. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 6:41 pm
The Natural Resources Section of the Hawaii State Bar Association (HSBA) will host a panel of guest speakers who will present, “Introduction to Land Trusts in Hawaii," at its Tuesday, May 3, 2011 monthly brown bag lunch meeting from 12:00 to 1:00 p.m. at the HSBA conference room. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 5:20 pm by Record on Appeal
Today, April 27, 2011, the Ninth Circuit issued the following order transfering the motion for consideration by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California: Filed order (STEPHEN R. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 2:31 pm by Greg Mersol
  First, it found that while the FAA did not preempt state law rules of general contract interpretation, the California requirements went beyond those rules. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 1:05 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that declared a class waiver ban unenforceable under California law. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 12:28 pm
" AT&T and others have similarly tried to have class-action cases dismissed on these grounds, though state supreme courts in both California and Washington have held that contractual waivers for class arbitration or litigation are "unconscionable" and therefore void based on those states' consumer protection laws. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 12:05 pm by Michael Fox
 Many employers may well wait until July when that shoe drops to do the recalculation between barring class/collective actions via arbitration or continuing to take their chances in the court system. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 9:26 am by Gritsforbreakfast
" You could say the same thing about Texas courts, and the state bar, and just about everybody else whose job it should be to hold prosecutors accountable for misconduct.MORE: From Paul Kennedy.See related Grits posts:Legislature should limit immunity for sleazebag prosecutors like Charles SebestaA 'perverse' position on prosecutors fabricating evidence ... from the Obama AdministrationProsecutors seldom disciplined for misconduct; can they be held liable in… [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 6:00 am by Robert Ambrogi
He has a team of legal editors in the United States and India who produce the CasemakerDigest, a service that provides summaries of federal and state cases. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 12:13 pm by John Elwood
California Public Utilities Commission, 10-838, for Talk America, Inc. v Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 10-313 and Isiogu v. [read post]