Search for: "Rodriguez v. Superior Court" Results 141 - 160 of 162
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Dec 2010, 11:36 am by stevemehta
The Cassidys and their son Daniel subsequently cross-complained against Blix Street for royalties allegedly owing.2 The trial of the case commenced in March of 2006, presided over by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Lee Edmon. [read post]
23 May 2017, 12:40 pm by Jordan Brunner, Chris Mirasola
Ruiz agreed to do so, and further argued that, unlike Turner v Safley, it would not be beyond the court’s jurisdiction to order such accommodations. [read post]
22 Oct 2011, 11:24 pm
Decisions of interest concerning Labor and Employment Law Source: Justia October 21, 2011  Velazquez-Rodriguez v. [read post]
26 May 2016, 6:00 am by Administrator
Following the release of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Carter, the leader of the Liberal Party expressed support for the decision and made a motion in the House of Commons to appoint a special committee to ‘consider the ruling of the Supreme Court; that the committee consult with experts and with Canadians, and make recommendations for a legislative framework that will respect the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the priorities of Canadians. [read post]
9 Oct 2015, 12:15 pm by John Elwood
  The Court issued a stay in that case, Whole Women’s Health v. [read post]
16 Aug 2007, 7:20 am
Orangeburg County School District No. 2, 518 S.E.2d 259, 261 n.7 (S.C. 1999) ("[b]y placing one's mental or physical condition in issue, a party has done an act which is so incompatible with an invocation of the physician-patient privilege that the privilege is deemed waived"); Rodriguez v. [read post]
15 Feb 2007, 12:25 am
Superior Court, 231 P.2d 26, 28 (Cal. 1951); Wright v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 11:34 am by David Post
" And third, we now know exactly what the Agreement said, because Daniels has put it into the public record, appending it to a Complaint she recently filed in CA Superior Court seeking a declaration that the Agreement is invalid and unenforceable [more on this suit below]. [read post]