Search for: "Good v. State of California"
Results 121 - 140
of 8,112
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Nov 2014, 5:44 am
Moreno, will come as good news. [read post]
10 Feb 2020, 4:26 am
Whether a contract for the purchase of goods entered into, and fully performed by, an Indian Tribe outside the exterior boundaries of the state in which the Tribe’s reservation is located can constitutionally subject the out of state vendor to the specific personal jurisdiction of the buyer’s state, under state laws purporting to regulate the sale of those goods in the buyer’s state.2. [read post]
6 Feb 2020, 2:45 pm
(Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, January 21, 2020, Techno Lite, Inc., v. [read post]
25 Sep 2022, 12:37 pm
Yes, this is the same Crest v. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 10:00 pm
Brown, Jr. v. [read post]
21 Jun 2018, 11:23 am
In August 2012, the district court certified a class of “[a]ll persons who, during the applicable statute of limitations, were employed by Wal-Mart in the State of California in the position of Cashier. [read post]
11 Nov 2019, 11:39 am
In Miller Marital Deduction Trust, et al. v. [read post]
2 Jan 2012, 6:33 am
But the “standing” issue is currently being decided by the United States Supreme Court in another case from California, Toby Douglas v. [read post]
4 Mar 2014, 9:01 pm
Last week, the United States Supreme Court decided Fernandez v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 2:03 pm
Good Georgia Lawyer's favorite advocacy group Public Citizen states that this is a dangerous decision which has impacts beyond consumer cases. [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]
20 Jun 2014, 1:06 am
As previously discussed in other posts (here and here), California state courts have created a collage of varying conclusions as to whether Gentry remains good law after Concepcion. [read post]
11 May 2009, 10:45 am
Dist., 194 P.3d 1026, 1032 (Cal. 2008) (“[California’s equitable HATFIELD v. [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 1:51 pm
Nordstrom California Supreme Court: Retail Privacy Statute Doesn’t Apply to Download Transactions – Apple v Superior Court (Krescent) CA Court Confirms that Pineda v Williams-Sonoma (the Zip-Code-as-PII Case) Applies Retrospectively — Dardarian v. [read post]
15 Feb 2011, 9:32 pm
The AEP v. [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 8:08 am
The decision in State of California ex rel Bartlett v Miller is helpful precedent that keeps the door open to such outsider whistleblowers. [read post]
18 Dec 2013, 5:14 am
The landmark Alexander Van Horn v. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 10:55 am
States like California have a great deal on the line in Janus v. [read post]
13 Aug 2007, 10:52 pm
Here is the abstract:In Stone v. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 6:00 am
(Good luck with that.) [read post]
