Search for: "California v. Law"
Results 9361 - 9380
of 33,021
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Sep 2011, 7:23 pm
In PLIVA v. [read post]
12 Jan 2010, 2:47 am
App. 2009), 321 Henderson Receivables Origination, LLC v. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 4:42 pm
Rather, that's what the California Supreme Court says today about two recent law review articles. [read post]
18 Apr 2007, 12:39 pm
Maybe we need to do a little more Westlaw training (or, perhaps, careful wordsmithing).Footnote 8 of this opinion by Justice Benke says "Appellant concedes that the term taint hearing does not occur in Westlaw's databases, current California case law, California statutes or Witkin's California Criminal Law treatise. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 12:06 pm
Just in time to rally support for its subject, Samantha Barbas, Buffalo Law, has published Actual Malice: Civil Rights and Freedom of the Press in New York Times v. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 12:33 pm
Zapien v. [read post]
10 Feb 2015, 10:53 am
California’s FEHA law (Fair Employment and Housing Act) prohibits quid pro harassment and permits the employee to sue both the employer and the harasser. [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 4:34 am
At Newsweek, Marie Solis reports on National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. [read post]
16 Dec 2010, 5:39 pm
Of course, those "tired arguments" were eventually accepted by the Supreme Court in Apprendi v New Jersey (530 US 466 [2000]), Blakely v Washington (542 US 296 [2004]) and Cunningham v California (549 US 270 [2007]). [read post]
18 Sep 2008, 6:50 pm
Supreme Court's holding in Exxon Shipping Co. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2015, 5:42 am
Zaborowski and DIRECTTV, Inc. v. [read post]
30 Dec 2008, 4:49 pm
"What, did Lionel Hutz pass the California bar? [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 4:45 pm
Lindor's legal defense in UMG v. [read post]
5 May 2011, 5:46 am
On May 4, 2010, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals killed Hollywood by holding that implied contracts for the sale of ideas that were previously protected under California state law (pitch meetings for films) were preempted by the Copyright Act. [read post]
22 Feb 2011, 10:06 am
Yesterday's Drug & Device Law talked about a recent decision by District Judge Manual Real, of California's Central District, dismissing a pacemaker case at the pleadings phase on grounds of preemption, lack of injury and failure to plead facts with particularity. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 2:30 pm
Borello & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
12 Dec 2010, 11:31 am
District Judge James V. [read post]
22 Oct 2012, 1:50 pm
Then, in Miller v. [read post]
28 Mar 2013, 9:01 pm
Supreme Court’s oral argument on Tuesday in Perry v. [read post]
