Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 8601 - 8620
of 33,836
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2014, 1:21 pm
In association with Bloomberg Law [read post]
28 Apr 2014, 12:43 pm
Exhausted by nearly a decade of litigation, the parties settled California law wage and hour claims on behalf of a class of over 4,000 employees. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 10:00 am
” In 2008, the California Supreme Court, in Edwards v. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 5:01 am
And, based on the CCA opinion in Griffith v. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 3:42 pm
" As Attorney General, representing the People of California, you have a duty to enforce and apply the law. [read post]
20 Mar 2015, 4:21 pm
Schmidt v. [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 8:05 pm
Watson v. [read post]
10 Oct 2023, 7:54 am
While it is a given that the causation principles underlying California’s workers’ compensation laws require only that an injury be linked in some causal manner to employment to make it compensable ( see , Clark v. [read post]
5 Oct 2009, 8:55 am
Today in No. 08-1596, Rhine v. [read post]
28 Feb 2012, 5:09 am
Sasaki, supra, 23 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1451-1452; California Teachers Assn. v. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 7:01 am
THE COLLATERAL SOURCE RULE IS UNQUESTIONABLY THE CONTROLLING LAW IN CALIFORNIA The collateral source doctrine has been the rule in California since at least 1925. [read post]
29 Jun 2017, 12:40 pm
See Bruton v. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:22 pm
PALO ALTO, California - To jailbreak or not to jailbreak the iPhone. [read post]
26 Aug 2013, 7:38 am
In Dennis v. [read post]
7 Dec 2011, 4:51 pm
It would have overturned a California Supreme Court decision, People v. [read post]
24 Jan 2007, 11:39 am
It's been a slow day today -- just one published opinion each from the Ninth Circuit and California Court of Appeal. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:00 am
Ajamian v. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 12:38 pm
On May 29, 2019, the California State Assembly overwhelmingly passed AB 5, a bill seeking to codify Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Feb 2019, 12:44 pm
In Gilberg v California Check Cashing Stores LLC, the court held that an employer violates the FCRA by including, in a pre-background check notice form, information about a job applicant’s rights under various state laws. [read post]
3 Apr 2009, 11:21 am
By Robert Milligan and Nicholas Waddles The California Supreme Court's decision in Edwards v. [read post]
