Ad
related to: plaintiff files summary judgment california unlawful detainer timeline page
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]
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that added behavior that "shocks the conscience" into tests of what violates due process clause of the 14th Amendment. [1] This balancing test is often criticized as having subsequently been used in a particularly subjective manner. [2] [3]
In 1936, the Supreme Court of California held that because the state constitution reserves judicial decisionmaking to the judicial branch, it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of certiorari to review the decision of a state board unless that board had been expressly authorized by the state constitution to exercise judicial power. [34]
The California courts have long grappled with the appropriate standard for determining whether a worker is properly classified as an employee or an independent contractor for the purpose of California’s employment laws. At common law, the employment relationship was determined by the degree of control over the details of the work being performed.
Vergara v. California was a lawsuit in the California state courts which dealt with a child's right to education and to instruction by effective teachers.The suit was filed in May 2012 by lawyers on behalf of nine California public school student plaintiffs.
The parents of a 13-year-old girl who was run over by a suicidal driver in Malibu in 2010 are appealing to California Gov. Gavin Newsom to stop the felon from being released on parole.
The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the judgment of the California District Court of Appeal. In an opinion by Justice Douglas, expressing the view of six members of the Court, it was held that the denial of counsel under the California rule of procedure stated above violated the Fourteenth Amendment.
Get breaking news and the latest headlines on business, entertainment, politics, world news, tech, sports, videos and much more from AOL
Ad
related to: plaintiff files summary judgment california unlawful detainer timeline page