Search for: "CROSS v. COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA" Results 1 - 20 of 1,392
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2021, 8:43 am by Kristian Soltes
This followed news that the financial software giant Intuit is suing the two brands in federal court, alleging price fixing, and that the U.S. [read post]
16 Apr 2021, 8:14 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Appellants and the Department cross moved for summary judgment, and the District Court granted the Department’s motions on all counts. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 7:32 am by John Elwood
Jander to further clarify the issue, but the court sent the case back to the court of appeals without resolving it on the merits, so that the court of appeals could address in the first instance additional arguments the parties had raised. [read post]
2 Apr 2021, 1:44 pm by fvanloon
” The records were turned over to us as a result of our March 2019 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against HHS, of which the FDA is a part (Judicial Watch v. [read post]
28 Mar 2021, 4:41 pm by INFORRM
As already mentioned on 25 March 2021 the Court of Appeal handed down two judgments. [read post]
18 Mar 2021, 10:28 am by Richard Hunt
Once you leave California, default starts to look like an even better strategy, as shown in Caplan v. [read post]
1 Mar 2021, 7:31 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
As to rounding, the Court of Appeal relied on See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2021, 10:56 am by Jacob Schulz
I wrote two weeks ago about a time when seditious conspiracy charges stuck at trial and survived on appeal. [read post]
16 Feb 2021, 2:23 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  Three California state courts enforced federal forum provisions for Delaware companies in Wong v. [read post]
14 Feb 2021, 3:33 pm by Richard Hunt
The case is typical of a strand of cases from federal courts in California that apply pleading and jurisdiction rules in ways that make life harder for serial litigants. [read post]
14 Feb 2021, 11:29 am by Venkat Balasubramani
Trancos is a key case where a California appeals court held that emails that do not identify the sender violate California’s spam statute. [read post]