Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 8641 - 8660
of 33,836
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Feb 2017, 6:42 am
" The Court of Appeals determined that New York common law does not recognise a "public performance right" in their decision in Flo & Eddie v. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 12:14 pm
Walker in Loper Bright Enterprises v. [read post]
2 Sep 2014, 2:09 pm
Moore, 553 U.S. 164, 168 (2008); California v. [read post]
5 Sep 2023, 4:00 am
The video game producers prevailed, and the Court found that the California law was prohibited under the First Amendment. [read post]
21 Sep 2020, 7:18 am
California (2000) Allowed Quechan Tribes water rights claims to proceed. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 5:35 am
If Fox is producing a story about a Californian, it will need to avoid including sufficiently intimate facts (at least so long as it worries that a judge and jury will find them not to be newsworthy), for fear that California law would apply.[16] Again, a state's law would thus have an extraterritorial effect on what Fox creates in New York and distributes throughout the country. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 12:52 pm
Hampton v. [read post]
29 Jan 2016, 10:55 am
Regents of the University of California, et al. [read post]
15 Jan 2020, 10:45 am
The State of California now agrees with Ellis’s interpretation of the law but does not agree to grant him the new trial he seeks. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 6:43 am
District Court, Northern District of California). [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 6:43 am
District Court, Northern District of California). [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 10:12 am
The court also has a pair of new administrative law cases, both captioned American Hospital Association v. [read post]
7 Sep 2009, 10:43 am
Basileh v. [read post]
10 Aug 2010, 9:52 am
(July 27, 2010) --- Cal.App.4th ---.The plaintiffs filed a putative class action for violation of the Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") and California wage and hour laws. [read post]
11 Nov 2009, 12:45 am
Co. v. [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 2:25 pm
California Emergency Physicians Medical Group, that a “no re-hire” provision in a settlement agreement could constitute a restraint of trade in violation of California law. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 8:38 am
The Supreme Court opinion in Riegel v. [read post]
20 Feb 2008, 8:38 am
The Supreme Court opinion in Riegel v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 7:10 am
In Laboy v. [read post]
5 Sep 2014, 3:29 pm
Levitt v. [read post]
