Search for: "SHAW v. CALIFORNIA" Results 1 - 20 of 243
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
30 Sep 2020, 2:00 am by Mark I. Schickman, Schickman Law
 Moritz v Universal City Studios (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, 9/2/20). [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 1:35 am
California - The California Supreme Court upholds the attorney-client privilege for outside counsel’s communications to a corporate client Seyfarth Shaw LLP "On November 30, 2009, in a highly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court strongly preserved the sanctity of the attorney-client privilege in Randall et al. v. [read post]
11 Aug 2014, 11:40 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  It should be noted that, after this Release went to press, the California Supreme Court addressed these issues and more in detail in Duran v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 6:49 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLPRecently, one of our colleagues, Jim Harris, attended the oral argument in Iskanian v. [read post]
25 Jan 2013, 3:34 pm by Eric Schweibenz
  Accordingly, under this supposition, the disputed issues were whether the prior art (i) satisfies the limitations requiring “superposed perimeter edge portion arrangements;” (ii) discloses shielded, non-superposed areas; (iii) teaches a consecutive 5-layer stack-up; (iv) satisfies the spacing relationships recited in the asserted claims; and (v) teach a substrate. [read post]
20 Aug 2013, 4:43 am by Law360
The California Court of Appeal's recent decision in California Building Industry Association v. [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 3:08 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLP By David Kadue On Tuesday, January 20, 2015, the Court declined to take the case of CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 9:44 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLPBy Kristen Verrastro and Michele Haydel Gehrke Loyal readers will recall our discussion of the perplexing Cochran v. [read post]
4 Feb 2015, 1:19 pm by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLP By Daniel Whang In plaintiff-friendly California, it may be surprising to learn that the California Supreme Court threw a few bones to employers during 2014. [read post]
10 Apr 2017, 11:30 am
 We shouldn't force the parties to waste money (or allow the losing party to sandbag) by making them participate in a meaningless trial.Kudos to the California Supreme Court for unanimously overruling its prior precedent to the contrary. [read post]
21 May 2014, 11:01 am by Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Authored by Seyfarth Shaw LLPBy Chris Crosman Reporting time pay is one of the provisions of California wage and hour law that is often overlooked by employers. [read post]
14 Dec 2011, 6:30 am
Buffington, Partner, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, writes: In Oglio Entertainment Group, Inc. v. [read post]