Search for: "Bates v. Superior Court" Results 21 - 40 of 48
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Aug 2010, 2:41 pm by Bexis
  In the drug area, as we reported before, the Pennsylvania Superior Court thoroughly killed the concept in Lance v. [read post]
10 Nov 2006, 1:29 pm
Marketing is the news report that describes an outcome in court or in the boardroom. [read post]
21 Nov 2006, 11:25 am
Marketing is the news report that describes an outcome in court or in the boardroom. [read post]
1 Jun 2011, 8:48 am by South Florida Lawyers
Bates, 998 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Burgos v. [read post]
8 Oct 2008, 11:50 am
Superior Court, 920 P.2d 1347, 1351 n.2 (Cal. 1996); Brown v. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 3:16 am by Giles Peaker
The FTT agreed with that analysis, finding: (1)   There is a distinction between a liability to pay and a cost, as the Court of Appeal had explained in OM Property Management v Burr. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 8:16 am by Tim Eavenson
All the while, the world is waiting with bated breath to see what the Supreme Court has to say about Dukes v. [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 8:13 am by Steve Hall
A superior court judge in San Francisco recently ordered CDCR to comply. [read post]
4 Oct 2015, 11:24 pm by INFORRM
In Buck v Morris et al., 2015 ONSC 5632 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed a libel action arising out of a “Statement from the Town of Aurora Counsel”. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
  We await the reargued decision with bated breath – actually that’s not true; we’d be bluer than a Blue Dog Democrat if that were so. [read post]
23 May 2011, 5:00 am by Kevin
From a complaint filed last week in San Francisco:  Michael M ____ v. [read post]
4 May 2022, 5:01 am by Albert W. Alschuler
She was the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (and the mother of current Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch). [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 5:09 pm by INFORRM
Douglas, 2015 ONSC 1104 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded general damages of Can$30,000 to the individual plaintiff in respect of five postings on a bulletin board which were accessed 742 times. [read post]
23 Dec 2021, 1:04 am by Mark Savill
Barrister Justin Bates discussed the Rakusen v. [read post]