Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Five Superior Courts—in Orange, Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin, and Ventura Counties—use CCMS version 3 to process civil cases. This represents approximately 25 percent of the civil case volume in California. [3] Fresno is the only Superior Court still using version 2 of CCMS.
Case history; Prior history: Review granted, California Court of Appeal decision depublished: Subsequent history: Remanded back to Court of Appeal for further proceedings: Holding; Plaintiff stated a cause of action in lack of informed consent and breach of fiduciary duty, but not in conversion: Court membership; Chief Justice: Malcolm M. Lucas ...
Defendant convicted in Los Angeles County Superior Court; conviction affirmed by California Court of Appeal; California Supreme Court declined review, and the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari, 535 U.S. 969 (2002). Holding; California's three strikes law does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case which involved the question of within what period of time must a suspect arrested without a warrant (warrantless arrests) be brought into court to determine if there is probable cause for holding the suspect in custody.
The California Court Case Management System (CCMS) is the court case management and electronic court filing (e-filing) system intended for use by the several courts, though development has been stalled since 2012. Since then, all courts not yet on CCMS have resorted to a variety of alternative solutions.
Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967), was an important decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which was argued February 15–16, 1967, and decided June 12, 1967. The case involved Fourth Amendment and Fifth Amendment rights, the taking of handwriting exemplars, in-court identifications and warrantless searches.
Those cases predate Prop. 22, originating during a period when gig workers were misclassified and should have been considered employees under California law, the labor commissioner argues in the ...
Appellate review of the decisions of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, [37] the Public Utilities Commission, [38] and the Workers Compensation Appeals Board of the Department of Industrial Relations [39] is available only by petition for writ of review (California's modern term for certiorari) to the relevant California Court of Appeal ...