Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
§ 745(a)(1): Prohibits racial bias or animus exhibited toward the defendant by an attorney, judge, law enforcement officer, expert witness or juror involved in the case because of the defendant’s race, ethnicity, or national origin. This category includes conduct at any stage of the criminal proceeding, even before trial and after sentencing.
By Tom Hals (Reuters) - Victims of the Los Angeles wildfires, likely the costliest in U.S. history, are seizing upon a unique California legal doctrine that allows them to collect from their power ...
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]
The case came out of a traffic accident between the plaintiff and the defendant in which both of them had been found to have been driving negligently. The plaintiff (Li) had attempted to cross three lanes of oncoming traffic to enter a service station ; the defendant's (Yellow Cab Co.) driver was traveling at an excessive speed when he ran a ...
In the last decade, the two largest race discrimination cases brought by the federal government in the Golden State alleged widespread abuse of hundreds of Black employees at Inland Empire warehouses.
Larry P. v. Riles is a California court case in which the court held that IQ tests could not be used to place African-American students in special education classes.. Five African-American children had been placed in special classes for the "educable mentally retarded", based on low IQ test scores.
Yuba Power Products, Inc, was a California torts case in which the Supreme Court of California dealt with the torts regarding product liability and warranty breaches. The primary legal issue of the case was to determine whether a manufacturer is strictly liable in tort when an article he places on the market proves to have a defect that causes ...
Perez v. Sharp, [1] also known as Perez v. Lippold or Perez v.Moroney, is a 1948 case decided by the Supreme Court of California in which the court held by a 4–3 majority that the state's ban on interracial marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.