Search for: "DOE DEFENDANT"
Results 4781 - 4800
of 112,757
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2024, 4:00 am
Fortunately, our democracy does not depend on any president. [read post]
26 Feb 2023, 12:14 pm
[T]he fact that Defendants proffer a religious rationale does not mean that Defendants should be granted immunity from Plaintiffs’ claims. [read post]
16 Jun 2021, 12:23 pm
The court concluded that defendants violated the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, and that the law does not infringe defendants' free speech or free exercise rights:Defendants denied Ms. [read post]
22 Jan 2013, 7:49 am
§117 does not allow the pursuit of a lawsuit to establish liability of a Defendant for the sole purpose of recovering from the Defendant’s carrier after that Defendant has received a discharge in bankruptcy. [read post]
10 Jan 2014, 1:50 pm
A person can be convicted of bribery by offering to bribe a public official even if the public official does not intend to follow through with the request or does not even have the ability to perform the request. [read post]
25 May 2016, 7:32 am
The Court concludes that it does not. . . . [read post]
23 Dec 2023, 7:48 am
If the plaintiff does not meet this burden, their claims may be dismissed, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. [read post]
5 Nov 2012, 6:57 am
The doctrine of equitable estoppel prevents a defendant from asserting the statute of limitations as a defense when the defendant has engaged in conduct that was calculated to mislead the plaintiff into believing that it was unnecessary to file suit. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 2:45 pm
Does 1-100, 2010 WL 3923880 (D. [read post]
1 Feb 2014, 1:49 pm
However, in view of the defendant's use of a multiple of legally prescribed drugs, the defendant does challenge the validity of the test in this case. [read post]
27 Nov 2013, 11:02 am
Pursuant to the Bruton doctrine, the Confrontation Clause is violated when the prosecution at a joint jury trial introduces a co-defendant's statement that facially incriminates another defendant unless the defendant testifies at trial. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 8:41 pm
How does, or does not, Roper help capital defendants who committed then-capital crimes when juveniles and took non-parolable life sentence deals pre-Roper in order to avoid the death penalty? [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 2:29 pm
Plaintiff Doe sued various Pennsylvania-based entities (the “Guthrie Defendants”) that owned and operated the Guthrie Clinic Steuben (the “Clinic”) located in New York after one of the Clinic’s nurses sent six text messages to Doe’s girlfriend informing her that Doe was being treated for sexually transmitted diseases. [read post]
8 Jun 2010, 5:24 am
" The court rejected defendant's argument that the Federal Circuit's affirmance of the ITC's determination of invalidity relieved defendant of royalty obligations. [read post]
23 Mar 2009, 6:58 am
In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's grant of a motion to stay federal trademark claims against Indian tribal defendants pending a determination of jurisdiction by a tribal court. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 12:46 pm
March 25 Kicking off the March 25 session, after conducting the rights colloquy with the defendants, military judge Col. [read post]
29 Mar 2009, 1:31 pm
Underwriters, Inc. (2nd Dept., decided 3/24/2009) Sometimes plaintiffs deliberately plead into coverage; sometimes they do just the opposite, so the defendant does not enjoy liability coverage. [read post]
6 May 2010, 7:23 pm
” However, creating a proper defence for a speeding trial does not require that the defendant viewed the speed measuring device to confirm that the officer read it correctly. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 7:36 am
[T]he fact that [plaintiff] does not manufacture products [does not] undermine [its] continuing research and development operations, as Defendants suggest. . . . [read post]
2 Sep 2015, 6:44 am
By way of example, “the complaint does not indicate how much Plaintiffs’ profits have decreased since Defendants began their advertising campaign; it does not quantify or estimate the decrease in goodwill; it does not quantify the number of potential customers who allegedly have been lost because of Defendants’ statements or how that number would be measured. [read post]
