Search for: "In re Tobacco Cases II"
Results 161 - 180
of 342
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am
We're talking about the Restatement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability §2, to be precise. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 4:44 am
Again, plaintiffs cited In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298 (2009), to argue that they were not required to allege which representations they specifically saw. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 12:20 am
Even if they did, In re Tobacco II merely provides that to establish UCL standing, reliance need not be proved through exposure to particular advertisements; the case does not stand for, nor could it, a general relaxation of the pleading requirements under Rule 9(b). [read post]
25 Aug 2010, 7:22 am
” Indeed, it seems that it took significant forensic accounting to figure out what had gone on in this case. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 2:50 pm
According to the Vancouver Business Journal (Nov. 17, 2008), employers lose 70% of the negligent hiring cases filed against them, with verdicts sometimes reaching as high as $1million. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 10:14 pm
Cir. 2008) (citing BMC Res., Inc. v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 7:47 am
Following In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, the Court held that an “inference of common reliance” may be applied to a CLRA class that alleges a material misrepresentation consisting of a failure to disclose a particular fact. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal.4th 298, 325 n.17 (2009). [read post]
15 Jul 2010, 3:16 pm
.'" (In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 305 (Tobacco II), citing Bus. [read post]
14 Jul 2010, 10:49 am
" (In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 319.) [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
.' (In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 319.) [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 10:13 am
” (In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, 319.) [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 5:00 am
LEXIS 60554 at *27-*28, *37 (citing In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal.4th 298, 324 (2009)). [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 2:59 am
What we discovered is that this was not the case. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 10:04 am
USACE, Case No. 09-15363. [read post]
7 Jun 2010, 9:54 am
USACE, Case No. 09-15363. [read post]
24 May 2010, 11:26 am
After World War II, epidemiology developed the assessment of case-control and cohort studies to permit reliable detection and quantification of causal associations between diet, medications, social habits, and occupational or environmental exposures and various chronic diseases. [read post]
21 May 2010, 6:32 am
The trial court had ruled on the plaintiff's motion for class certification some six months before the California Supremes' decision in In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298 (2009). [read post]
10 May 2010, 5:41 am
The fraud prong of their UCL claim was barred for lack of standing, the court concluded, citing In re Tobacco II Cases. [read post]
4 May 2010, 5:00 am
Fenrich: You're referring to the 1978 amendments? [read post]
