Case law

United States v. Carona

571 F. Supp. 2d 1157 · District Court, C.D. California · May 21, 2008

See United States v. … Fields v. Brown, 503 F.3d 755, 772 (9th Cir.2007); Patton v. Yount, 467 U.S. 1025, 1038 , 104 S.Ct. 2885 , 81 L.Ed.2d 847 (1984).

California Ex Rel. California Department of Toxic Services v. Neville Chemical Co.

213 F. Supp. 2d 1115 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 26, 2002

Chapter 169 requires the State Board of Equalization (Board) to collect the fees established by the Department under the Act. … See United States v.

California Trout, Inc. v. United States Bureau of Reclamation

115 F. Supp. 3d 1102 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 22, 2015

Littoral Soc’y v. … See, e.g., Lockyer v.

Viacao Aerea Sao Paulo v. International Lease Finance Corp.

119 F.R.D. 435 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 24, 1988

Farmer v. Arabian American Oil, 379 U.S. 227, 235 , 85 S.Ct. 411, 416 , 13 L.Ed.2d 248 (1964). … DeRoburt v. Gannett Co., Inc., 558 F.Supp. 1223, 1228 (D.Haw.1983).

ADO FINANCE, AG v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.

938 F. Supp. 590 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 7, 1996

Fed.R.Civ.P., 11(c)(2); Beatrice Foods Co. v. New England Printing & Lithographing Co., 899 F.2d 1171, 1177 (Fed.Cir.1990) (holding that a “principal purpose” of section 1927 is deterrence); Brown v. … See Zimmerman v. Bishop Estate, 25 F.3d 784, 790 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 637 , 130 L.Ed.2d 543 (1994); Lockary v.

3570 East Foothill Blvd., Inc. v. City of Pasadena

912 F. Supp. 1268 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 2, 1996

See also Wolff v. … After this hearing, the board must affirm, modify, or reverse the decision within 30 days. Id. If the board fails to act within the time limit, then the original decision is deemed affirmed. Id.

United States v. Lee, Goddard & Duffy, LLP

528 F. Supp. 2d 1005 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 20, 2007

Brown, Office of U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner. John Steven Gordon, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent. … See Crystal v. United States, 172 F.3d 1141, 1143 (9th Cir.1999).

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wilson

997 F. Supp. 1244 · District Court, C.D. California · Nov 14, 1997

Michigan Connors & Freezers v. Agricultural Marketing and Bargaining Board, 467 U.S. 461, 469 , 104 S.Ct. 2518 , 81 L.Ed.2d 399 (1984); Florida Lime & Avocado Growers v. … Dish v.

Tobias M. P. v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, C.D. California · Jan 20, 2026

Brown-Hunter v. Colvin, 806 F.3d 487, 492 (9th Cir. 2015) (as 18 amended); Parra v. Astrue, 481 F.3d 742, 746 (9th Cir. 2007). … Brown-Hunter, 806 F.3d at 492 (citation 3 omitted).

Quiksilver, Inc. v. Kymsta Corp.

247 F.R.D. 579 · District Court, C.D. California · Oct 18, 2007

Unlike the cases defendant cites, in which a party voluntarily disclosed privileged communications to gain a legal advantage, see Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. Univ. v. … .”); Beery v.

United States v. El Camino Community College District

454 F. Supp. 825 · District Court, C.D. California · Jul 26, 1978

The Fifth Circuit in Board of Public Instruction of Taylor County, Florida v. … The court in United States v.

Driskell v. United States

431 F. Supp. 339 · District Court, C.D. California · May 2, 1977

See Caton v. United States, 495 F.2d 635 (9th Cir., 1974); Avril v. United States, 461 F.2d 1090 (9th Cir., 1972); Bialowas v. United States, 443 F.2d 1047 (3rd Cir., 1971). Rivera v. … Hungerford v. United States, 307 F.2d 99, 102 (9th Cir., 1962); see also Ashley v. United States, 413 F.2d 490 (9th Cir., 1969); Dulaine v. United States, 371 F.2d 824 (9th Cir., 1967); Brown v.

Klock v. Cain

813 F. Supp. 1430 · District Court, C.D. California · Feb 17, 1993

See id. at 152 , 158 Cal.Rptr. 562 (Brown, P.J., concurring). Thus, this portion of the decision must be regarded as dicta. … However, Elder v.

Mason v. Field

308 F. Supp. 205 · District Court, C.D. California · Jan 13, 1970

As stated in Eason v. … See also Rose v. Haskins, 388 F.2d 91, 95 (6 C.A., 1968). In Mead v.

Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division/IBT v. BNSF Railway, Inc.

134 F. Supp. 3d 1208 · District Court, C.D. California · Sep 22, 2015

If necessary, they may then appeal to the National Railroad Adjustment Board (“NRAB”) or another board of adjustment agreed to by the parties. 6. … See Buffalo Forge Co. v.

Common Cause Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Greater Los Angeles v. Jones

213 F. Supp. 2d 1106 · District Court, C.D. California · Aug 24, 2001

There are five Supreme Court opinions which discuss the standard to be applied in fundamental right to vote cases: Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 , 84 S.Ct. 1362 , 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964); Harper v. … Virginia Board of Elections et al, 383 U.S. 663 , 86 S.Ct. 1079 , 16 L.Ed.2d 169 (1966); Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 , 103 S.Ct. 1564 , 75 L.Ed.2d 547 (1983); Burdick v.

Jose Ayala v. Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles

District Court, C.D. California · Mar 7, 2024

Brown v. Ahern, 676 F.3d 899, 903 (9th Cir. 23 2012). Another valid exception is when a prisoner raises a “colorable claim 24 of double jeopardy.” Stanley v. Baca, 555 F. … Brown, 676 6 | F.3d at 901; Stanley, 555 F. App’x at 708. 7 10.

Thompson v. Zavin

607 F. Supp. 780 · District Court, C.D. California · Jun 21, 1984

Co. v. Merit Ins. … Mobil Oil Indonesia v.

Allied Orthopedic Appliances, Inc. v. Tyco Healthcare Group L.P.

247 F.R.D. 156 · District Court, C.D. California · Dec 21, 2007

Finally, Masimo began to make Tyco’s multi-parameter units Masimo-compatible simply by swapping an inexpensive Masimo oxime-try board for the original Tyco board. … Corp. v.

Contemporary Services Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

655 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, C.D. California · Mar 2, 1987

Levy v. Weissman, 671 F.2d 766 (3d Cir.1982); Cook v. Weber, 698 F.2d 907 (7th Cir.1983); Ryan v. State Board of Elections, 661 F.2d 1130, 1134 (7th Cir.1981). … Sigmond v. Brown, 645 F.Supp. 243, 245-47 (C.D.Cal.1986); Allington v. Carpenter, 619 F.Supp. 474, 476-79 (C.D.Cal.1985).