Search for: "Guzman v. District Court" Results 81 - 100 of 183
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 Oct 2013, 6:28 am by Joy Waltemath
Sysco Corporation’s allegations that, in an attempt to cover up his unauthorized access and disclosure of protected information to a competitor, a former employee deleted emails from the “sent” and “deleted” folders of his email account, was sufficient to constitute a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), a federal district court in Illinois ruled in denying the employee’s motion to dismiss this claim (Sysco Corp v Katz,… [read post]
24 Sep 2013, 10:12 am by Kirk Jenkins
  Counsel pointed out that after the Fifth District’s decision in Rogers had come down, the First District, Division Five had decided the same question the opposite way in Guzman v. 7513 West Madison Street, Inc. [read post]
24 Jul 2013, 9:21 am by Beth Graham
Finally, Houston’s First District held that the trial court committed error when it awarded post-judgment interest to Guzman. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 4:28 am by David DePaolo
Forged appealed, and on Tuesday, the 1st District Court of Appeals affirmed the $1.3 million award but denied Guzman interest on the award. [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 9:00 am by Don Cruse
The majority (written by Justice Guzman) holds that the record here does not support the jury’s conclusion. [read post]
27 Jul 2012, 8:23 pm by Edward X. Clinton, Jr.
Gunn, 355 S.W.3d 634, 653 (Tex.2011) (Guzman, J., dissenting) ("[T]he Supreme Court's fears have already been realized in USPPS.... [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 9:06 am by Don Cruse
Dissent (Jefferson, for 2 votes): PDF Mission Consolidated Independent School District v. [read post]
7 May 2012, 10:15 am by Erica Gann Kitaev
Zatkoff, a U.S. district judge sitting by designation, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 9:54 pm
” Considering state case law, the Idaho Supreme Court adopted the exclusionary rule in State v Arregui, 44 Idaho 43, 254 P. 788 (1927), and the good faith exception was not adopted in Guzman. [read post]