Search for: "Parrish v. Latham & Watkins"
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Oct 2017, 12:39 pm
S.C., Aug. 10, 2017, Parrish v. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 6:59 am
Parrish v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 6:32 am
FLIR Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 5:24 am
On April 6, 2012, Latham & Watkins was sued for malicious prosecution in Los Angeles Superior Court. [read post]
26 Oct 2015, 6:59 am
Parrish v. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 6:32 am
FLIR Systems, Inc. v. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 6:24 am
On April 6, 2012, Latham & Watkins was sued for malicious prosecution in Los Angeles Superior Court. [read post]
18 Aug 2017, 5:30 am
Latham & Watkins. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 3:03 pm
Latham & Watkins (2017) 3 Cal.5th 767, 775 (Parrish).) [read post]
2 May 2016, 7:00 am
William Parrish, et al., 174 Cal.App.4th 1270 (2009). [2] Parrish v. [read post]
2 May 2016, 7:00 am
William Parrish, et al., 174 Cal.App.4th 1270 (2009). [2] Parrish v. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 8:45 am
That is the question raised in a post this week by Epstein Becker's Trade Secrets and Unfair Competition Blog as it reports on a recent case filed in Los Angeles against Latham & Watkins. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 2:10 am
Latham & Watkins, 238 Cal.App.4th 81 (2015), the California Supreme Court recently announced it will reconsider that decision. [read post]
