Search for: "In Re CAL"
Results 861 - 880
of 5,796
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Feb 2012, 11:06 am
Assume that you're a 37 year old man.The answer, of course, is (B). [read post]
29 Sep 2008, 11:33 pm
And, for goodness sake, don't pass counterfeit bills to pay your motel bill while you're still there, at least if there's stuff in the motel room you'd like to hide.Because passing the counterfeit bills to pay for your room may eliminate your reasonable expectation of privacy and justifies a warrantless entry by the police.P.S. - Here, that principle doesn't apply, since unwittingly passing a counterfeit bill (which is all the evidence here allegedly showed)… [read post]
4 Aug 2011, 6:53 am
Barista's note: We're on the road today at the ABA Annual Meeting, so don't have the time to set this one out in detail. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 1:21 pm
You’re tripping, bro. [read post]
16 Jun 2022, 3:14 pm
Maybe you're just yapping. [read post]
17 Mar 2009, 10:29 am
Sorry they're so long, but I want you to have the full details. [read post]
9 Aug 2011, 1:16 pm
This is why you should always check the plaintiff's social security number whenever you're sued in an employment case. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 11:31 am
This sophisticated discussion (and accompanying litigation) would all be unnecessary if Juror Number One had followed the judge's instructions and refrained from posting comments about the pending trial on Facebook.Remember that the next time you're on a jury. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 10:14 am
And when they're sued for doing so, they can file an anti-SLAPP motion, get the lawsuit dismissed, and recover their fees.So holds the Court of Appeal. [read post]
11 Jul 2008, 1:00 pm
Sprint Spectrum, LP, S153846 (see Cal. [read post]
27 Nov 2020, 2:03 pm
In re Canady (Cal. [read post]
5 Feb 2008, 3:20 am
Docket No. 854 (in re Roche Molecular Sys.) [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 11:03 am
In re Kowalczyk (Cal. [read post]
28 Feb 2021, 8:27 pm
In re Hoze (Cal. [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 6:38 pm
In re Van Houten (Cal. [read post]
2 Oct 2021, 6:30 pm
In re Marti (Cal. [read post]
13 Jun 2021, 3:40 pm
In re Palmer (2021) 10 Cal.5th 959 Summary: The California Supreme Court held that prisoners may challenge their continued incarceration as constitutionally excessive when the Board repeatedly denies parole. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 8:11 am
Cal. [read post]
1 Dec 2024, 12:27 pm
In re Nguyen (Cal. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 2:55 pm
(In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740 (Estrada).) [read post]
