Search for: "Defendant Doe 1"
Results 441 - 460
of 46,089
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2007, 8:39 pm
The Defendant acknowledges that he does not have a possessory or ownership interest in the garage. [read post]
26 Dec 2013, 11:21 am
Cooley Law School (Cooley) filed a complaint in Ingham County against Defendant John Doe 1 (Doe 1) alleging defamation arising from statements that Doe 1 made on a website that, under a pseudonym, criticized Cooley. [read post]
2 Mar 2021, 8:58 am
And what does this teach us about the hidden rules of ownership?] [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 5:25 pm
Taking defendant in for fingerprinting was unreasonable. [read post]
25 May 2014, 11:08 am
This is a proceeding wherein the defendant is charged with Assault in the Third Degree (PL § 120.00[1]), Harassment in the Second Degree (PL § 240.26[1]), Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Fourth Degree (PL § 265.01[1]) and Unlawful Possession of an Air Pistol (AC § 10-131[b]). [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 5:17 am
Here, the defendant was arrested and a 45 minute search incident of the entire premises occurred without a warrant. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 2:57 am
Even if defendant’s arrest was illegal, the exclusionary rule does not bar testimony of defendant assaulting the officer during the arrest. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 8:33 am
An order for security can be an important defendant’s tool since a plaintiff who is ordered to, but does not post, security for costs will be precluded from pursuing its claims. [read post]
3 Jan 2008, 3:31 am
The Court said that "if a potential defendant with self-interest in objecting is in fact at the door and objects, the co-tenant's permission does not suffice for a reasonable search, whereas the potential objector, nearby but not invited to take part in the threshold colloquy, loses out. [read post]
2 Apr 2013, 2:42 pm
Ohio Oct. 1, 2012). [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 1:33 am
This does not violate Rule 41 or the Fourth Amendment. [read post]
27 Apr 2007, 12:55 pm
Defendant, however, consented to the entry. [read post]
5 Mar 2013, 6:13 am
Malibu Media seeks a permanent injunction against infringing activities; an order by the court to remove infringing materials from all computers of each defendant; an award of statutory damages of $150,000 per infringed work - which would total over $1 million for many defendants - and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. [read post]
14 Nov 2022, 7:37 am
When it does, how should the court treat those payments you made? [read post]
11 Mar 2012, 7:04 am
Defendant makes two points in opposition. [read post]
4 Aug 2010, 2:43 pm
§ 7206(1). [read post]
17 Aug 2019, 3:59 pm
LEXIS 740, at *1].) [read post]
23 Apr 2009, 6:03 am
Does 1-16, a "John Doe" case targeting students at the State University of New York at Albany, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has issued a stay of the RIAA subpoena and all proceedings during the pendency of John Doe #3's appeal.This is a case in which several John Does had moved to quash the subpoena, vacate the ex parte discovery order, and dismiss the complaint.The motion to vacate, quash, and dismiss, was based on a… [read post]
24 Dec 2007, 4:44 am
_uacct = "UA-2909018-1"; urchinTracker(); [read post]
7 Sep 2007, 5:12 am
CONCLUSION Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. [read post]
