Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Pavlovich filed a motion to quash service of process, asserting that the court did not have personal jurisdiction over him. [2] The trial court denied the motion and Pavlovich petitioned the Court of Appeal for a writ of mandate directing the court to grant the motion. The Court of Appeal denied the petition without issuing a published opinion ...
The petitioner must arrange for the lodging of the administrative record, and then, depending upon local rules, get the petition onto the court's motion calendar for a hearing and ruling on its merits by way of an ex parte application for an order to show cause or a motion for writ of administrative mandate. The superior court either holds oral ...
Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court and Charles Lee, Real Party in Interest, 4 Cal.5th 903 (Cal. 2018) was a landmark case handed down by the California Supreme Court on April 30, 2018. A class of drivers for a same-day delivery company, Dynamex, claimed that they were misclassified as independent contractors and thus unlawfully deprived of ...
A motion to quash is a request to a court or other tribunal to render a previous decision or proceeding null or invalid. The exact usage of motions to quash depend on the rules of the particular court or tribunal. In some cases, motions to quash are requests to nullify a decision made by the same or a lower court.
Burnham v. Superior Court of California, 495 U.S. 604 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case addressing whether a state court may, consistent with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident of the state who is served with process while temporarily visiting the state.
A motion to strike is a request by one party in a United States trial requesting that the presiding judge order the removal of all or part of the opposing party's pleading to the court. These motions are most commonly sought by the defendant, as to a matter contained in the plaintiff's complaint; however, they may also be asserted by plaintiffs ...
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]
Defense for Children International – Palestine et al v. Biden et al is a lawsuit by Defence for Children International – Palestine et al in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against President Joe Biden, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken for the U.S. officials; alleged "failure to prevent and complicity in the ...