21 Cited authorities

Healy v. the Beer Institute
491 U.S. 324 (1989) Cited 486 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state statute violated the Commerce Clause because it had the practical effect of establishing scale of prices for use in other states
Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp.
174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999) Cited 1,075 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding mark use was not sufficiently public when used in a website domain and in "limited correspondence with lawyers and a few customers"
Wash. Mut. Bank v. Superior Court of Orange Cty.
24 Cal.4th 906 (Cal. 2001) Cited 561 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a choice of law provision may not be disregarded “merely because it may hinder the prosecution of multi-state or nationwide class action or [exclude] nonresident consumers from a California-based class action”
People v. Mendoza
23 Cal.4th 896 (Cal. 2000) Cited 455 times
In People v. Mendoza (2000) 23 Cal.4th 896, 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 431, 4 P.3d 265 (Mendoza), a jury convicted the defendants of murder without specifying the degree but also found true the special circumstance that it was committed during a robbery.
Ford Motor Co. v. Texas Dept. of Transp
264 F.3d 493 (5th Cir. 2001) Cited 286 times
Holding that Ford's online showroom of used vehicles advertised for sale "concerned unlawful activity," and thus was not protected commercial speech under Central Hudson, because Texas law prohibited manufacturers like Ford from selling cars directly to consumers
People v. Cruz
13 Cal.4th 764 (Cal. 1996) Cited 287 times
Holding that burglary of an inhabited vessel constituted burglary of "an inhabited dwelling house"
Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc.
51 Cal.4th 524 (Cal. 2011) Cited 175 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that the court's ruling that ZIP code information constitutes personal information within the meaning of section 1747.08 applies retrospectively
Snowney v. Harrah's Entertainment, Inc.
35 Cal.4th 1054 (Cal. 2005) Cited 151 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Snowney, a California resident filed a class action in this state against a group of Nevada hotels, alleging several causes of action related to their purported failure to provide notice of an energy surcharge imposed on hotel guests.
Marina Point, Ltd. v. Wolfson
30 Cal.3d 721 (Cal. 1982) Cited 233 times
Holding that apartment complex could not, under the Unruh Act, prohibit families with children
Mitchell v. United National Ins. Co.
127 Cal.App.4th 457 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) Cited 104 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding a concealed fact is "material" if the non-disclosed information would have an impact on the risk that the insurance company assumes and the terms under which it would issue an insurance policy
Section 7701 - Congressional findings and policy
15 U.S.C. § 7701 Cited 183 times 8 Legal Analyses
Describing the Congressional findings and purpose of the Act

APPLE v. S.C. (KRESCENT)

21 Cited authorities

Holding that a state statute violated the Commerce Clause because it had the practical effect of establishing scale of prices for use in other states

Holding mark use was not sufficiently public when used in a website domain and in "limited correspondence with lawyers and a few customers"

Holding that a choice of law provision may not be disregarded “merely because it may hinder the prosecution of multi-state or nationwide class action or [exclude] nonresident consumers from a California-based class action”

In People v. Mendoza (2000) 23 Cal.4th 896, 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 431, 4 P.3d 265 (Mendoza), a jury convicted the defendants of murder without specifying the degree but also found true the special circumstance that it was committed during a robbery.

Holding that Ford's online showroom of used vehicles advertised for sale "concerned unlawful activity," and thus was not protected commercial speech under Central Hudson, because Texas law prohibited manufacturers like Ford from selling cars directly to consumers

Holding that burglary of an inhabited vessel constituted burglary of "an inhabited dwelling house"

Holding that the court's ruling that ZIP code information constitutes personal information within the meaning of section 1747.08 applies retrospectively

In Snowney, a California resident filed a class action in this state against a group of Nevada hotels, alleging several causes of action related to their purported failure to provide notice of an energy surcharge imposed on hotel guests.

Holding that apartment complex could not, under the Unruh Act, prohibit families with children

Holding a concealed fact is "material" if the non-disclosed information would have an impact on the risk that the insurance company assumes and the terms under which it would issue an insurance policy

Describing the Congressional findings and purpose of the Act