Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The California Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA") is the name for California Civil Code §§ 1750 et seq. [1] The CLRA declares unlawful several "methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or which results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer". [2]
Section 17200 includes five definitions of unfair competition: (1) an unlawful business act or practice; (2) an unfair business act or practice; (3) a fraudulent business act or practice; (4) unfair, deceptive, untrue, or misleading advertising; or (5) any act prohibited by Sections 17500-17577.5. [20]
The California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act is in §502 of the California Penal Code. According to the State Administrative Manual of California, the Act affords protection to individuals, businesses, and governmental agencies from tampering, interference, damage, and unauthorized access to lawfully created computer data and ...
The term statute of frauds comes from the Statute of Frauds, an act of the Parliament of England (29 Chas. 2 c. 3) passed in 1677 (authored by Lord Nottingham assisted by Sir Matthew Hale, Sir Francis North and Sir Leoline Jenkins [2] and passed by the Cavalier Parliament), the long title of which is: An Act for Prevention of Frauds and Perjuries.
Rice v. Norman Williams Co., 458 U.S. 654 (1982), was a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court involving the preemption of state law by the Sherman Act.The Supreme Court held, in a 9–0 decision, that the Sherman Act did not invalidate a California law prohibiting the importing of spirits not authorized by the brand owner.
Danny Elfman has lost a bid to dismiss a defamation lawsuit brought by fellow composer Nomi Abadi over statements he made to Rolling Stone in 2023 that were included in an investigative piece ...
The act provides immunity to the State of California and its related entities from being sued. The law immunizes public employees from liability for “instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding” within the scope of their employment, “even if” the employees act “maliciously and without probable cause.” (Cal. Gov. Code, § 821.6)
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime.