Search for: "CALIFORNIANS v. CALIFORNIA"
Results 81 - 100
of 588
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2011, 11:13 pm
After the recent 5-4 SCOTUS ruling in Brown v. [read post]
6 Oct 2011, 10:22 am
” Wilson v. [read post]
15 Aug 2013, 6:42 am
The legislation (SB 292) was introduced for the express purpose of overturning a California Appeals court decision, Kelley v. [read post]
19 Sep 2013, 12:49 pm
The panel remanded the case for the district court to determine whether the ethanol provisions discriminate in purpose or effect and, if not, to apply the balancing test established in Pike v. [read post]
8 Sep 2023, 5:28 pm
In Loral Corp. v. [read post]
28 Nov 2022, 4:50 pm
The epicenters of California’s franchise earthquakes include the FAST Act and AB-5, the law that codified the ABC employment definition articulated in the Dynamex Operations West v. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 5:00 am
In Norwest, the Court of Appeal held that non-Californians could bring UCL claims if the conduct constituting the violation occurred in California. [read post]
30 Apr 2012, 3:28 pm
Neighbors for Smart Rail v. [read post]
15 Nov 2011, 11:11 am
But I bet you that for the majority of Californians, this opinion has greater practical significance than 99.999% of anything else they'll read in the pages of the California Appellate Reporter.The critical issue is this: Can you use your cell phone at a red light? [read post]
27 Apr 2007, 1:56 pm
Lockyer v. [read post]
6 Apr 2014, 9:51 am
Since the time of Brown v. [read post]
27 Aug 2020, 10:24 am
” In a subsequent California Supreme Court case, People v. [read post]
5 Jul 2019, 4:28 pm
The Riverside County Superior Court just granted a motion filed by Compassion & Choices on behalf of two terminally ill Californians seeking to intervene in the Ahn v. [read post]
11 Oct 2022, 9:01 pm
Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral argument in National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) v. [read post]
29 Jun 2013, 1:14 am
California, in which the California Supreme Court voided a law, authorized by the constitution, allowing racial discrimination in land ownership, and Reitman v. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 1:14 am
California, in which the California Supreme Court voided a law, authorized by the constitution, allowing racial discrimination in land ownership, and Reitman v. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 4:07 pm
On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in the matter of Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Jun 2019, 4:58 am
Steel Corp. v. [read post]
7 Mar 2007, 7:56 am
It's a kind of Car Buyer's Bill of Rights for Californians. [read post]
11 Jul 2023, 8:06 am
Schutte v. [read post]
