Search for: "Golden v. State of California"
Results 161 - 180
of 586
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Apr 2013, 9:06 pm
In a recent published decision, Golden Gate Land Holdings, LLC v. [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 12:13 pm
" True that, I guess.)The Court of Appeal not only affirms, but also drops a footnote: "We assume the trial court and attorney Weisberg have already reported the judicially imposed sanctions to the State Bar of California. [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 6:53 pm
A. v. [read post]
17 Aug 2022, 10:18 am
United States (Federal Tort Claims Act) Simmons v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 9:00 pm
Otherwise, the Court held in its 1992 case Quill Corp. v. [read post]
7 Jan 2014, 8:35 am
Golden Gate Land Holding, LLC v. [read post]
24 Dec 2009, 8:05 am
Golden Eagle Refinery Co. v. [read post]
4 Dec 2009, 12:50 am
In Conner v. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:33 pm
California State University, Bakersfield (2020) 47 Cal.App.5th 799, 811.) [read post]
5 Dec 2016, 3:40 pm
Trustees of the California State University (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 833, 851-852), the Court also acknowledged that “[t]he distinction between elements of a project and measures designed to mitigate impacts of the project may not always be clear” (quoting Lotus v. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 10:52 pm
And if California had already decided to support Apple, the Golden State wouldn't have to request this extension as the motion changes nothing about the briefing schedule in that event (to support Apple, California would have to file by March 1 one way or the other). [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 9:01 pm
California law, as reflected in the 1978 California Supreme Court ruling in Schmitz v. [read post]
6 Feb 2019, 5:51 am
Although the Supreme Court provided guidance in Comedy III Prods., Inc. v. [read post]
12 Jul 2023, 8:57 pm
The court said: “Plaintiffs allege that Cisco designed, developed, and optimized important aspects of the Golden Shield surveillance system in California; that Cisco manufactured hardware for the Golden Shield in California; that Cisco employees in California provided ongoing maintenance and support,” among others. [read post]
17 Apr 2007, 6:12 pm
I'm not going to do an in depth analysis of yesterday's Cal Supremes decision in Murphy v. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 9:01 pm
Perry, the case from California involving Proposition 8 (the voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriages in the Golden State), I offer below a few thoughts on what to expect and what to look for in the Court’s ruling. [read post]
29 Oct 2013, 6:43 am
The California Court of Appeal recently addressed this issue in Angelica Textile Services v. [read post]
23 Oct 2019, 11:14 am
For example, in Golden State Transit Corp. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 6:25 pm
The Supreme Court said in Underhill v. [read post]
18 Sep 2022, 9:50 am
The DOJ and the Golden State will indeed speak. [read post]
