CONTACT ME


  • Kimberly A. Kralowec
    The Kralowec Law Group
    180 Montgomery Street,
    Suite 2000
    San Francisco, CA 94104
    Tel: (415) 546-6800
    Fax: (415) 546-6801
    Web: www.kraloweclaw.com
    Email: uclpractitioner@gmail.com

December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

« New UCL preemption decision: Viva! v. Adidas | Main | Petition for review filed in Schwartz v. Visa »

Monday, November 28, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345172b069e200d83462811b53ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Two new unpublished Prop. 64 retroactivity opinions:

Comments

Scott McMillan

I was afraid you were going to put that Gallery Corp decision up here. I don't think Judge Huffman appreciates my interpretation of the law.

Kimberly A. Kralowec

Sorry, Scott. Nothing personal. I made a decision back in November of last year (based on the wise advice of my firm's managing partner) to be comprehensive in my coverage, even if what I'm covering might not help the plaintiffs' side. I'm very glad I did. A treatise is useless if it cites only the cases on one side of an issue.

Scott McMillan

Yes, but of course! Sorry if my comment seemed reproachful; it was not intended to be.

Yesterday, the court ordered publication of the decision.

The comments to this entry are closed.

2014 Supreme Court Calendar


Research


Disclaimer


  • Nothing in this blog constitutes legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult an attorney in your jurisdiction. To read this blog's complete disclaimer, click here.


  • The UCL Practitioner
    © 2003-2014
    by Kimberly A. Kralowec
    All rights reserved.


  • Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner




  • Header design by Webmotion
    Photos by Jack Gescheidt
    Powered by TypePad