Search for: "Defendants A-F" Results 341 - 360 of 29,721
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Apr 2012, 4:30 am
Shorts, 552 F.3d 327, 332 (4th Cir.2008) have extended the Shamrock Oil rule also to bar removal by a third-party defendant, i.e. a defendant who was not the original plaintiff. [read post]
12 Sep 2013, 12:55 pm by Steven G. Pearl
Bank National Association, 479 F.3d 994, 999 (9th Cir. 2007), which held that a removing defendant must establish the amount in controversy to a legal certainty. [read post]
2 Apr 2009, 4:19 pm
He talked about how he is a Washington State Juvenile Public Defender. [read post]
12 May 2018, 9:54 am by Eric Goldman
Among other claims, ISE sued the defendants for violating 512(f), saying the requests to Amazon were improper takedown demands. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 9:55 pm by White Collar Crime Prof Blogger
According to a federal defender, "[f]ederal public defenders are facing unprecedented and devastating funding cuts in FY14, and the present plan would reduce budgets by 26% and staff by 33% nationally -- making these offices by far the hardest "hit"... [read post]
1 Apr 2017, 11:25 am
"Top U.S. officials defend courthouse arrests of undocumented immigrants in escalating feud with California justice": In today's edition of The Washington Post, Matt Zapotosky has an article that begins, "Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John F. [read post]
2 Jun 2008, 7:31 am
May 30, 2008) (NO. 6:07 CV 451) Judge: Leonard DavisHolding: Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings or in the Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTEDOne interesting issue I have seen come up more than once in local patent infringement litigation is what happens when a patent holding company settles claims against one defendant, and then a later case is filed either by a company related to the releasing plaintiff against the released defendant, or… [read post]
19 Mar 2007, 10:46 pm
The defendants then sought a stay from the Fifth Circuit. [read post]
Manheim Investments, Inc., 775 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir. 2015), the defendant’s showing was inadequate to meet its burden of showing that the amount in controversy exceeded the amount required under § 1332(d). [read post]