Search for: "In re Tobacco Cases II"
Results 141 - 160
of 342
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jan 2011, 3:20 am
Kubus (EPLAW) Nigeria Slow news day: Relocation of the Trademarks Registry in Nigeria (Afro-IP) Puerto Rico Puerto Rico gears up for university-originated R&D exploitation reforms (IP tango) Poland Cold Case: SOLERO trademark case (Class 46) The protection of economic turnover – CHOLESTIN (Class 46) Well known trademarks (Class 46) South Africa SACTWU warns that factories may close due to counterfeiting (Afro-IP) I put it on a shirt first, Swaziboy–Swazi Boy… [read post]
6 Jan 2011, 3:31 pm
In re Baycol Cases I and II: Did the “death knell doctrine” require plaintiff to immediately appeal the sustaining of a demurer as to class claims when the ruling resolved both individual and class claims, or did the one final judgment rule apply and require a single appeal from the subsequent entry of final judgment on all claims? [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 2:47 pm
The Court offered this interesting discussion concerning reliance: In California, “a presumption, or at least an inference, of reliance arises wherever there is a showing that a misrepresentation was material,” In re Tobacco II Cases, 466 Cal.4th 298, 397 (2009). [read post]
28 Dec 2010, 3:30 am
Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 08-16158, 2010 WL 2866923 (11th Cir. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 10:18 am
Reynolds Tobacco Co., 537 F.3d 1357, 1365 (Fed. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 8:50 am
Original Article 08/31/2010 By Allison Glock LOCATED IN A WAREHOUSE outside Dallas, the windowless Metroflex Gym is not air-conditioned, an aesthetic choice that edits the clientele to a select group of cops, bikers, bodybuilders and other masochists who thrive on the deprivation that exercising in unfiltered 110-degree heat produces. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 2:05 am
British American Tobacco defeats trade mark challenge in the Commonwealth Caribbean: Philip Morris Products S.A. v British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited (jiplp) Brazil Can we feed the hungry on statistics? [read post]
9 Dec 2010, 3:05 pm
(citing Tobacco II, 46 Cal.4th at 326, 93 Cal.Rptr.3d 559, 207 P.3d 20). [read post]
22 Nov 2010, 6:59 am
Under Tobacco II, actual reliance can be proved by showing that a misrepresentation or nondisclosure was an immediate cause of the plaintiff’s injury-producing conduct. [read post]
16 Nov 2010, 5:45 am
Plaintiff relied heavily on In re Tobacco II Cases (2009) 46 Cal.4th 298, which held that absent class members subjected to a pervasive advertising campaign do not have to demonstrate reliance to obtain relief in a UCL class action. [read post]
New federal UCL "fraudulent" prong decision: In re Neurotonin Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
12 Nov 2010, 5:00 am
This case shows just how powerful the UCL can be. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 1:38 pm
In re Neurontin Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, -- F. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 5:00 am
Justice Moreno: You’re not seeking the full amount of out-of-pocket loss? [read post]
1 Nov 2010, 2:14 pm
Unlike In re Steroid Hormone Product Cases, 181 Cal. [read post]
31 Oct 2010, 5:02 pm
One could only imagine the hue and cry if a scholarly conference had been funded by an organization that had in turn been set up by, say, the tobacco industry. [read post]
14 Oct 2010, 10:11 am
We have no problem with either in SMW II.That being said, we’re not going to delve too deeply into large portions of SMW II. [read post]
5 Oct 2010, 5:00 am
In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298, 312 (2009) (footnote omitted) (emphasis added). [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 9:26 am
We don't mind being criticized; we're lawyers. [read post]
16 Sep 2010, 1:22 pm
We do some work for GSK (the Colacicco case for one), but we’re not involved in this Sheet Metal litigation. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 10:48 am
We shift to first gear to discuss the case of Hamilton v. [read post]
