This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
For the second week in a row, the Supreme Court’s conference produced no straight grants , but there were some actions of note, including: Supreme Court won’t hear CARE Act challenge. Century-National Insurance Company is a grant-and-hold for Another Planet Entertainment v. COVID insurance grant-and-hold. In San Jose Sharks v.
At the Supreme Court’s conference yesterday, actions of note included: Four-justice concurring statement leaves open future remedies for defendant who made “disastrous decisions” at trial Employment timekeeping. The court agreed to hear Camp v. Superior Court (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th The court granted-and-held Dhital v.
At yesterday’s Supreme Court’s conference , a double one, actions of note included: AB 333 retroactivity. The court agreed to hear People v. where he appeals for a second time after his judgment was conditionally reversed and the Court of Appeal issued a limited remand to the trial court to address sentencing issues?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content