Latest Law News
WALKOWIAK v. MP ASSOCIATES
Plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in granting summary judgment based on the sophisticated user defense. They also claim evidentiary error. While we agree with the trial court that the sophisticated user defense applies here to bar liability
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
WALKOWIAK v. MP ASSOCIATES
Plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in granting summary judgment based on the sophisticated user defense. They also claim evidentiary error. While we agree with the trial court that the sophisticated user defense applies here to bar liability
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
PEOPLE v. BRADLEY
He appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by denying his suppression motion. We affirm. In January 2009, Bradley entered a plea of nolo contendere to one count of infliction of corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant in case No. TA103843.
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
PEOPLE v. AVILES
Defendant offered the men beer, and they all drank together. 1 Marquez thought defendant appeared buzzed but not drunk. After the men finished drinking, defendant turned on music in the garage. Marquez and the others resumed barbecuing.
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
MELONCON v. CITY OF LONG BEACH
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, stating: "I believe in this case the evidence is that the plaintiff did not properly file or timely file the government claim to the clerk or city auditor of the City .
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
MELONCON v. CITY OF LONG BEACH
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, stating: "I believe in this case the evidence is that the plaintiff did not properly file or timely file the government claim to the clerk or city auditor of the City .
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
MELONCON v. CITY OF LONG BEACH
The trial court granted the motion for summary judgment, stating: "I believe in this case the evidence is that the plaintiff did not properly file or timely file the government claim to the clerk or city auditor of the City .
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
GERBOSI v. GAIMS, WEIL, WEST & EPSTEIN, LLP
2 The trial court issued an order denying both motions, leaving Gerbosi's and Finn's complaints to proceed unabated against Gaims. Later, the court entered an order jointly awarding attorneys' fees to Gerbosi and Finn in an amount of roughly $220000.
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
GERBOSI v. GAIMS, WEIL, WEST & EPSTEIN, LLP
2 The trial court issued an order denying both motions, leaving Gerbosi's and Finn's complaints to proceed unabated against Gaims. Later, the court entered an order jointly awarding attorneys' fees to Gerbosi and Finn in an amount of roughly $220000.
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
GERBOSI v. GAIMS, WEIL, WEST & EPSTEIN, LLP
2 The trial court issued an order denying both motions, leaving Gerbosi's and Finn's complaints to proceed unabated against Gaims. Later, the court entered an order jointly awarding attorneys' fees to Gerbosi and Finn in an amount of roughly $220000.
Updated: 03/10/2011 07:20A
Primary Categories