Search for: "State v. Ibarra"
Results 1 - 20
of 58
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Oct 2019, 6:29 am
See, e.g., Ibarra v. [read post]
30 Sep 2019, 6:05 am
In Diaz v Ibarra, 2019 WL 4394491 (D. [read post]
19 Oct 2018, 8:00 am
In Ibarra v. [read post]
26 Sep 2018, 9:11 am
In terms of average civil cases per judge, the Northern, Eastern, Central, and Southern District Courts rank 11th, 4th, 11th, and 76th nationally.[2] Ibarra v. [read post]
11 May 2018, 8:57 am
On May 8, 2018, the court in Ibarra v. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 10:25 am
The Cartwright Act is California’s primary state antitrust law. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 10:25 am
The Cartwright Act is California’s primary state antitrust law. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 10:25 am
The Cartwright Act is California’s primary state antitrust law. [read post]
9 Dec 2017, 9:46 pm
’ Or, as Justice Perram observed (at paragraph [134]), ‘[t]he question was not whether [SBA’s expert] Professor Gray was right and Dr Ibarra was wrong. [read post]
2 Dec 2017, 1:39 pm
_______________________NATIONAL COLLEGIATE STUDENT IN THE COURT AT LAW LOAN TRUST A DELAWARE STATUTORY TRUST PLAINTIFF … [read post]
15 Oct 2017, 10:01 pm
” Ibarra v. [read post]
15 Oct 2017, 10:01 pm
” Ibarra v. [read post]
15 Oct 2017, 10:01 pm
” Ibarra v. [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 3:00 am
Ultimately, under Ibarra v. [read post]
6 Mar 2017, 3:00 am
The plaintiff challenged the sufficiency of the defendant’s evidence, arguing that, under Ibarra v. [read post]
23 Jan 2017, 3:00 am
Clay v. [read post]
19 Aug 2015, 12:57 pm
Ana Hernandez (D-Houston) for outstanding service to the State of Texas, and Judge Debra Ibarra Mayfield as top Latina attorney age “40” and younger. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 6:19 am
In so ruling, the appeals court cited its decision in Ibarra v Manheim Investments, Inc., filed simultaneously with this opinion, which held that when a defendant relies on a chain of reasoning that includes assumptions to satisfy its burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million, the chain of reasoning and its underlying assumptions must be reasonable (LaCross v. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 6:17 am
Because the employer had not done so here, the appeals court remanded for both sides to submit proof on the amount in controversy (Ibarra v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 6:36 am
Also bolstering his claims was evidence that a decisionmaker questioned whether he was an illegal immigrant, that the only two other employees fired in the prior two-to-three years were also Mormon, and that there was a general animosity toward the general manager’s hiring of Mormons (Ibarra v City of Willmar, July 11, 2014, Tunheim, J). [read post]
