Search for: "W. T. Grant Co. v. Superior Court" Results 101 - 120 of 164
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Nov 2021, 5:37 am by Eugene Volokh
[15] Does the litigant have a possible ulterior motive—whether personal or political—that isn't visible from the court papers? [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 1:06 pm by Steve Bainbridge
Granted, a footnote in the Supreme Court’s Basic v, Levinson opinion flatly stated that “trading and profit making by insiders can serve as an indication of materiality. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 3:32 pm by Wolfgang Demino
 Appeal from the Fulton Superior Court, Trial Court Cause No. 25D01-1601-CC-50 The Honorable Wayne E. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 2:00 pm by Maureen Johnston
Superior Court of California, Orange County 13-956Issue: Whether the California Court of Appeal erred when it deepened an acknowledged circuit split and held—contrary to this Court's decisions in Buckman Co. v. [read post]
31 May 2019, 9:47 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Anheuser-Busch Cos., No. 19-cv-218-wmc (W.D. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 8:23 am
Class actions in California's state superior courts went down, while class actions in California's federal courts went up. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 1:58 pm
Co., 521 F.3d 1351, 1360 (Fed. [read post]
4 May 2022, 5:01 am by Albert W. Alschuler
For the select committee to grant immunity to one or more persons in the “war room” and one or more in the White House, however, might be worthwhile. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 7:41 am by Law Lady
The Superior Court Appellate Division upheld a lower court's decision that New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Co. properly denied coverage to a policyholder identified only as "D.V. [read post]
15 Sep 2017, 5:45 am by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
        Argued October 12, 1993 -- Decided May 26, 1994On certification to the Superior Court, Law Division, Middlesex County.Simon Louis Rosenbach, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant (Robert W. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 9:52 am by Eugene Volokh
The Court determines that the potential harm to Plaintiff outweighs the prejudice to Defendant and the public interest for pretrial hearings.[25] Likewise, courts might allow pseudonymity while a settlement seems to be looming, but saying "[t]his is subject to change if the settlement craters. [read post]