Search for: "California v. Watson"
Results 21 - 40
of 221
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Aug 2020, 6:57 pm
Prior to the landmark case of People v. [read post]
25 Aug 2017, 6:20 am
However, the landmark case of People v. [read post]
19 Dec 2008, 4:42 pm
In a poorly decided opinion, Van Horn v. [read post]
15 Jan 2009, 8:17 am
On December 19th, we wrote an article about a poorly decided California Supreme Court decision, Van Horn v. [read post]
23 Feb 2007, 12:55 am
[Thanks to Richard Watson for the lead.] [read post]
19 Dec 2008, 5:02 pm
In Van Horn v. [read post]
14 Dec 2009, 7:07 am
Watson (08-6261), and Carachuri-Rosendo v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 11:11 pm
There's no immunity, at least in California, for pulling someone out of a burning car. [read post]
13 Feb 2010, 5:02 pm
Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 1:29 pm
In Pedersen v. [read post]
19 Jan 2023, 2:00 pm
Watson (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 905, 909 (Silver).) [read post]
21 Feb 2016, 1:42 pm
LEXIS 18479 (WD PA, Feb. 16, 2016), a California federal district court dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that he was denied the use of his legal religious name by the religious librarian.In Simmons v. [read post]
17 Apr 2009, 11:27 am
Watson, (Supreme Court of California, December 18, 2008) 197 P.3d 164, 45 Cal.4th 322, 197 P.3d 164, 86 Cal.Rptr. 3d 350, 08 Cal. [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 9:59 am
(patent infringement) 12/2: Konarka Technologies, DuPont Displays Inc. and The Regents of the University of California v. [read post]
22 May 2011, 5:34 pm
One Justice -- Justice Kennard, who earlier had signaled she favored the antiquated "deferential" approach of Watson v. [read post]
27 Jan 2022, 12:33 pm
” Presidio Components, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Feb 2007, 8:53 am
The specific issue in Watson v. [read post]
13 Feb 2009, 7:00 am
(C.D.Cal. 2008) 2008 WL 4690536 Watson-Smith v. [read post]
11 Jul 2020, 9:31 am
Well, friends, Watson v. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 6:16 pm
Banegas CA2/2 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. [read post]
