Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, San Francisco County, 582 U.S. ___ (2017), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that California courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendant on claims brought by plaintiffs who are not California residents and did not suffer their alleged injury in California. [1]
An immutable characteristic is any physical attribute perceived as unchangeable, entrenched and innate. The term is often used to describe segments of the population that share such attributes and are contrasted with others by those attributes, and is used in human rights law to classify protected groups of people who should be protected from civil or criminal actions directed against those ...
The California Court Case Management System (CCMS) is the court case management system intended for use by the several courts of the judiciary of California, which includes the Supreme Court, 6 Courts of Appeal, and 58 Superior Courts.
The principle of mutability is the notion that any physical property which appears to follow a conservation law may undergo some physical process that violates its conservation. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] John Archibald Wheeler offered this speculative principle after Stephen Hawking predicted the evaporation of black holes which violates baryon number ...
Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, 528 U.S. 152 (2000), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court decided an appellant who was the defendant in a criminal case cannot refuse the assistance of counsel on direct appeals.
Decided November 17, 1948; Full case name: Charles A. Summers v. Howard W. Tice, et al. Citation(s) 33 Cal.2d 80 199 P.2d 1: Holding; When a plaintiff suffers a single indivisible injury, for which the negligence of each of several potential tortfeasors could have been a but-for cause, but only one of which could have actually been the cause, all the potential tortfeasors are jointly and ...
This case history arose in relation to Cal. Civ. Code §1668, a statute that states "All contracts which have for their object, directly or indirectly, to exempt anyone from responsibility for his own fraud, or willful injury to the person or property of another, or violation of law, whether willful or negligent, are against the policy of the law."
Seila Law LLC (Seila Law), a law firm that provided debt relief services, was under investigation by the CFPB. As part of its investigation, the CFPB issued a civil investigative demand (CID) to Seila Law, which required Seila Law to produce certain documents. Seila Law declined to comply with the CID and challenged the constitutionality of the ...