Search for: "Jones v. State Bar (1989)"
Results 61 - 80
of 91
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2011, 3:25 pm
HarrisDocket: 10-224Issue(s): (1) Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that a “presumption against preemption” requires a “narrow interpretation” of the Federal Meat Inspection Act's express preemption provision, in conflict with this Court's decision in Jones v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
App. 1991), the court barred pharmacist claims.KentuckyHyman & Armstrong, P.S.C. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 6:02 am
App. 1994), emotional distress was determined unrecoverable under a statute that the Golden Staters call “Song-Beverly”.ColoradoThe Colorado Supreme Court, while noting that other states bar personal injury claims under consumer protection statutes, has yet to decide the question. [read post]
7 Apr 2011, 1:16 pm
Super. 1989), the plaintiff died, allegedly because of complications brought on by following the so-called “last chance diet. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 2:56 pm
The first problem I have with Jones' story is that the Delaware Supreme Court upheld the validity of the pill in Moran v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 8:07 am
General Motors Corp., 575 P.2d 1162, 1168-69 (Cal. 1978); see State Dept. of Health Services v. [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 11:46 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:00 am
Other Sources of Note: Jones v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 5:00 pm
., at or in the direction of another, whether or not the actor believes it to be loaded; or (5) Commits a simple assault as defined in subsection a. (1), (2) or (3) of this section upon: (a) Any law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his duties while in uniform or exhibiting evidence of his authority or because of his status as a law enforcement officer; or (b) Any paid or volunteer fireman acting in the performance of his duties while in uniform or otherwise clearly identifiable as… [read post]
16 May 2010, 3:00 am
May 14, 2007) (holding limitation of liability clause in alarm contract limiting recovery to $250 is valid); Jones v. [read post]
3 May 2010, 1:25 pm
Cir. 1989) ("[W]e find it difficult to agree that the inequitable conduct defense was 'baseless' when it survived a motion for summary judgment and was rejected only after findings were made on disputed facts. [read post]
26 Feb 2010, 5:09 am
Consequently, the court barred the EEOC from seeking relief on behalf of the 67 allegedly aggrieved persons. [read post]
29 Dec 2009, 2:20 am
Stated differently, the consumer has only suffered an economic loss. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 12:33 pm
However, the motion to amend the complaint should not have been granted since the breach of contract claim that plaintiff sought to add was duplicative of its existing claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith (see Canstar v Jones Constr. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 5:54 am
Jones v. [read post]
22 Nov 2008, 3:48 pm
State, 840 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 2002); Wright v. [read post]
3 Nov 2008, 7:03 pm
Lee, No. 06-3438 A sentence for various counts of bank fraud and aggravated identity theft is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in running several of the aggravated identity theft counts consecutively to each other; and 2) all of defendant's other issues on appeal were barred by his plea agreement or outside the scope of a remand order, and thus were barred. [read post]
27 Jul 2008, 3:27 pm
In Wilkes v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 11:03 pm
Callahan's claim is barred by a twoyearstatute of limitation. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:45 am
State, 545 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 1989)...................................................................................................8 Tafero v. [read post]
