§Why CasetextPricing

Ex Parte Application

undefined

15 Cited authorities

  1. Bernson v. Browning-Ferris Industries

    7 Cal.4th 926 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 248 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that fraudulent concealment “tolls the applicable statute of limitations, but only for that period during which the claim is undiscovered by plaintiff or until such time as plaintiff, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered it”

  2. CSC Holdings, Inc. v. Redisi

    309 F.3d 988 (7th Cir. 2002)   Cited 161 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that each unlawful act during the limitations period was actionable, but it was a fact question whether the plaintiff could have discovered defendants' unlawful acts prior to the limitations period

  3. Stewart v. Rolling Stone, LLC

    181 Cal.App.4th 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 100 times
    Applying New York Times standard to claims for common law and statutory misappropriation

  4. Krinsky v. Doe 6

    159 Cal.App.4th 1154 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 78 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in the context of an online message board containing "vulgar and insulting" language, a statement that the plaintiff had a "fake medical degree" was obviously intended as ridicule rather than a statement of fact

  5. People v. Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3

    195 Cal.App.4th 962 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 59 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting argument that challenged statements were not covered under section 425.16 because defamatory speech is illegal

  6. Regalia v. the Nethercutt Collection

    172 Cal.App.4th 361 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 53 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that " slander that falls within the first four subdivisions of Civil Code section 46 is slander per se"

  7. ZL Techs., Inc. v. Doe

    13 Cal.App.5th 603 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 37 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Identifying features of opinions

  8. Glassdoor, Inc. v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cnty.

    9 Cal.App.5th 623 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 9 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Applying a "tripartite standard of review"

  9. Warner Bros, Records Inc. v. Does 1-4

    Case No. 2:07 cv 0424 TC (D. Utah Jul. 3, 2007)   Cited 9 times

    Case No. 2:07 cv 0424 TC. July 3, 2007 ORDER AND MEMORANDUM DECISION GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE IMMEDIATE DISCOVERY BROOKE WELLS, Magistrate Judge Before the court is Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery (motion), filed June 27, 2007. Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging copyright infringement against four Doe Defendants and now seek discovery to ascertain their identity. Generally, "a party may not seek discovery from any source

  10. California Shellfish, Inc. v. United Shellfish Co.

    56 Cal.App.4th 16 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 16 times
    Holding that the losing party has the burden to show "substantial justification" under a discovery sanction statute, which uses the same language as section 405.38

  11. Section 2 - Principals

    18 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 24,534 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding aiders and abettors punishable as principals under federal criminal law

  12. Section 551 - Protection of subscriber privacy

    47 U.S.C. § 551   Cited 1,758 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting disclosure of "personally identifiable information" concerning cable subscriber without consent

  13. Section 2025.210 - Service of notice

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.210   Cited 17 times

    Subject to Sections 2025.270 and 2025.610, an oral deposition may be taken as follows: (a) The defendant may serve a deposition notice without leave of court at any time after that defendant has been served or has appeared in the action, whichever occurs first. (b) The plaintiff may serve a deposition notice without leave of court on any date that is 20 days after the service of the summons on, or appearance by, any defendant. On motion with or without notice, the court, for good cause shown, may

  14. Rule 3.1204 - Contents of notice and declaration regarding notice

    Cal. R. 3.1204   Cited 24 times

    (a) Contents of notice When notice of an ex parte application is given, the person giving notice must: (1) State with specificity the nature of the relief to be requested and the date, time, and place for the presentation of the application; and (2) Attempt to determine whether the opposing party will appear to oppose the application. (b) Declaration regarding notice An ex parte application must be accompanied by a declaration regarding notice stating: (1) The notice given, including the date, time