Search for: "California Company v. Price" Results 1 - 20 of 1,597
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jan 2011, 2:20 pm
The final judgment in People of the State of California v. [read post]
14 Aug 2018, 3:50 pm by Bona Law PC
Here’s the situation in California: In 1978, the California Supreme Court issued a decision called Mailand v. [read post]
6 Dec 2007, 3:19 pm
A price squeeze occurs when a vertically integrated company with a monopoly in the upstream market sets its wholesale prices to its customers so high that they cannot compete effectively with it at the downstream level. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc. (7/28/14) --- Cal.4th --- (discussed here), the California Supreme Court held that an Unfair Competition Law (UCL) action based on a trucking company’s alleged violation of state labor and insurance laws was not “related to a price, route or service” of the company and, therefore, was not preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA). [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 3:38 pm by Sheppard Mullin
On November 2, 2009, the California Supreme Court handed down its decision in Schachter v. [read post]
3 Nov 2009, 3:38 pm by Sheppard Mullin
On November 2, 2009, the California Supreme Court handed down its decision in Schachter v. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 8:00 am by Steven G. Pearl
The question at issue before the California Supreme Court in Pac Anchor relates more closely to the one decided in Dan's City: whether an action alleging that a trucking company violated the UCL by classifying its drivers as independent contractors is "related to the price, route, or service" of the company and, therefore, preempted by the FAAAA. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 6:13 pm
The Facts in Pfizer In Pfizer, retail pharmacy plaintiffs alleged that pharmaceutical companies fixed pharmaceuticals prices, and asserted claims under California’s antitrust statute - the Cartwright Act (Bus. [read post]
24 Apr 2019, 12:07 pm by Mara Curtis and Michael Kleinmann
California companies have been required to reconsider their use of independent contractors since the state’s Supreme Court outlined the new ABC test in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
As we previously wrote here, AB5 codified and expanded the “ABC test” adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 6:26 am by Joy Waltemath
” A California appeals court reversed, rejecting the finding that the UCL action was related to the company’s price, route, or service as a motor carrier and thus concluding the action was not FAAAA-preempted. [read post]