Search for: "Other Defendants-Class III-a, Class III-b, Class III-c" Results 341 - 360 of 473
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Sep 2015, 6:00 am by David Kris
Wiretap Act (also known as Title III) prohibits the interception of a live communication (e.g., a telephone call) only if the interception occurs in the United States; it does not prohibit or regulate wiretaps (interception) conducted abroad.[8]  Similarly, the U.S. [read post]
15 Jul 2011, 3:07 pm by Law Lady
§ 501.2105 entitle a prevailing defendant to an attorney's fee award in a case in which a plaintiff brings an unfair trade practices claim under the FDUTPA, but the district court decides that the substantive law of a different state governs the unfair trade practices claim, and the defendant ultimately prevails on that claim? [read post]
31 Aug 2012, 3:20 pm by Charles Johnson
On the lower end of the spectrum (Class C misdemeanor), the punishment may result in implementation of fines, attendance of anger-management or marriage counseling classes, or deferred adjudication. [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 12:53 pm by MOTP
The bottom line: The wrongful death plaintiffs cannot get a jury trial even though the arbitration agreement upon which the defendant relies to remove the case from court to arbitration was defective and unenforceable under Texas law. [read post]
11 Sep 2010, 11:37 pm by Steve Vladeck
Part III lays out the more general critique of such “framework” detention legislation. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 8:22 am by INFORRM
  It has four elements set out in clause 194(1): (a)  The claimant’s behaviour in relation to the matters complained of in the claim must have the effect of restraining the defendant’s exercise of the right to freedom of expression (b)  Any of the information that would be disclosed by the exercise of the right has to do with economic crime (c)   Any part of the disclosure would be for “a purpose related to the public interest in… [read post]
22 Dec 2020, 12:46 pm by Giles Peaker
It breached the PSED; and c. it failed to comply with the duty under section 29 of the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments for persons with disabilities; iii) The Allocation Scheme was unlawful on the grounds of unfairness; and iv) The Allocation Scheme was irrational. [read post]
16 Oct 2011, 6:42 pm by Law Lady
HOWARD DINNER, D.C., P.A., a/a/o DENISE CHAPMAN, Respondent. 4th District.Civil procedure -- Default on motor vehicle lease -- Summary judgment -- Trial court properly entered summary judgment where there were no issues of material fact -- Remand for correction of scrivener's errorGEORGE C. [read post]
3 May 2016, 5:08 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  This hack led to a putative class action complaint being filed against OPM and others in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in late June, 2015.[6]   As in the customer cases discussed above, the gravamen of the employee complaint against OPM is inaction. [read post]
19 Oct 2009, 7:48 pm
When you drink and drive you not only risk your life and those of your passengers, but the lives of every other driver and pedestrian on the road. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am by Ben
The USA was our next stopover with news that the smallest of the three major record labels, Warner Music Group (WMG) has submitted a proposed settlement to its ongoing digital royalty dispute class action with artistes. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 12:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
  Among the many questions that have arisen in the FDIC’s failed bank cases as individual defendants have tried to rely on the protection of the business judgment rule is whether or not the defense protects officers as well as directors (about which refer here) or whether it affords less protection to the directors and officers of banks than it does to corporate officials at other kinds of companies (about which refer here). [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 11:32 am by Eleonora Rosati
AE’s position was that L&S could not establish (a) and (c). [read post]
31 Dec 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
L.R. (6th) 26, rev’d on other grounds 2018 SCC 21, [2018] 1 S.C.R. 633, but disagreed on their application. [read post]