Search for: "SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL"
Results 9121 - 9140
of 29,228
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2021, 7:19 am
The second consideration is the disruption of accepting the view of the lower court. [read post]
24 Apr 2012, 1:59 pm
The trial court denied the second petition.In 2008, Mr. [read post]
20 Sep 2010, 5:21 am
The district court held that RCRA imposes liability on Apex to "abate this nuisance." [read post]
8 Feb 2007, 5:00 pm
Thus, the appeals panel approved the district court's instruction that permitted liability if the jury found that defendant "purchased more logs than it needed or paid a higher price for logs than necessary . [read post]
27 Jul 2011, 2:46 pm
The Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for further proceedings regarding a claim of unconscionability. [read post]
24 Jan 2007, 1:27 pm
Superior Court (Olmstead), 128 Cal.App.4th 246, 249 (2005) (Second Appellate District, Division Four). [read post]
10 Apr 2013, 11:44 am
Bingham then appealed the trial court’s decision, however, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court’s denial in a strong 3-0 decision – both ordering their opinion to be published in the appellate records and ordering Bingham to pay Harris her costs on appeal. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 1:38 pm
On appeal in 2020, the Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court’s ruling and held that the toy was an expressive work and therefore protected under the First Amendment after application of the Rogers test, a test fashioned by the Second Circuit in an attempt to balance the rights of brand owners and the First Amendment, rather than a traditional likelihood of confusion analysis under the Lanham Act. [read post]
27 Mar 2023, 1:38 pm
On appeal in 2020, the Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court’s ruling and held that the toy was an expressive work and therefore protected under the First Amendment after application of the Rogers test, a test fashioned by the Second Circuit in an attempt to balance the rights of brand owners and the First Amendment, rather than a traditional likelihood of confusion analysis under the Lanham Act. [read post]
1 Mar 2016, 8:00 pm
A Dutch court case is described below illustrating this principle: Utrecht District Court of 19 March 2009 (NJF 2009/291). [read post]
6 May 2013, 6:44 pm
Cribbing now from his abstract: District of Columbia v. [read post]
6 Jul 2015, 4:00 am
The court also directed Teacher’s reinstatement effective January 21, 2011, with back pay, reimbursement of benefits, and an award of compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at a hearing.In response to the School District’s appeal, the Appellate Division said:1. [read post]
28 Apr 2023, 10:00 am
As the Court of Appeals says in yesterday's Grady v. [read post]
5 Jan 2014, 5:56 pm
District Attorney for the Suffolk District, the Supreme Judicial Court held that the imposition of life without parole sentences on juveniles is unconstitutional. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 4:08 pm
The district court thus erred when it sentenced the defendant as a Tier III, rather than a Tier I, sex offender. [read post]
21 Oct 2009, 3:03 am
On October 19, 2009, in a securities case from an earlier era involved allegedly misleading statements regarding asset-backed securities, Southern District of New York Judge Harold Baer substantially denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint as amended, following the long-running case’s trip through the Second Circuit on interlocutory appeal. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 8:17 am
District Court Judge Gregory Frost.The 6th U.S. [read post]
19 Nov 2014, 9:21 am
The Colorado district court disagreed and held that the claims excluded any device with RAM. [read post]
11 Sep 2009, 2:42 pm
District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan that struck down similar provisions in a Bay City ordinance and in a state statute. [read post]
3 Jul 2008, 5:31 pm
First, a district court must examine the underlying facts of a crime to determine sex offender status instead of merely looking at a list of designated crimes. [read post]
