Search for: "Doe Defendants 1 to 20"
Results 6161 - 6180
of 8,963
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jun 2012, 1:38 pm
Litigation funding is based solely on the merits of the lawsuit; credit rating or job status does not matter. [read post]
7 Jun 2012, 8:17 am
In a 20-page Memorandum of Decision in Joseph Farah et al. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 8:45 am
Further, at what point does the driver know he is impaired? [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 6:00 am
The Judge then suspended the jail sentence, provided that Codair does not violate probation for a one year period. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 6:00 am
The Judge then suspended the jail sentence, provided that Codair does not violate probation for a one year period. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 2:00 am
The Court’s Statement of Decision (submitted by the Department) provides this explanation: A relief defendant is one that: (a) has received ill-gotten funds; and (b) does not have a legitimate claim to those funds. [read post]
6 Jun 2012, 2:00 am
The Court’s Statement of Decision (submitted by the Department) provides this explanation: A relief defendant is one that: (a) has received ill-gotten funds; and (b) does not have a legitimate claim to those funds. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 4:37 pm
The Birther hype allegedly caused Corsi's book to go to the "#1" position on Amazon. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:35 pm
Thames also defended on arguments about limitation and damages.A preliminary trial on the Marcic defence was held, Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd & Anor [2007] EWHC 2021 (TCC), in which the Court held that the relevant acts or omissions by Thames Water did form part of their duties imposed by S.94(1) Water Industry Act 1991, only enforceable by Ofwat under s.18 of the Act, with no common law enforceability (Marcic) for a claim in nuisance only. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:35 pm
Thames also defended on arguments about limitation and damages.A preliminary trial on the Marcic defence was held, Dobson & Ors v Thames Water Utilities Ltd & Anor [2007] EWHC 2021 (TCC), in which the Court held that the relevant acts or omissions by Thames Water did form part of their duties imposed by S.94(1) Water Industry Act 1991, only enforceable by Ofwat under s.18 of the Act, with no common law enforceability (Marcic) for a claim in nuisance only. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 3:00 am
Respect for the foreign court does not diminish when a refusal to enforce its judgment is based on material that could not, through the exercise of reasonable diligence, have been placed before that court. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 2:48 pm
It does not make sense to a non-copyright lawyer that a fair use might still be in violation of the anticircumvention law, and so they don’t think of it or even believe it. [read post]
4 Jun 2012, 10:14 am
Michelle has practiced business litigation for over 20 years, and took one year away from her large law firm practice to be a Los Angeles County Assistant Public Defender where she further sharpened her trial skills and won all her jury trials. [read post]
3 Jun 2012, 9:07 am
I want to focus briefly on 3 of them: (1) economics & the law school bubble, (2) advertising & runners, and (3) court modernization & judicial pay. 1. [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 9:46 am
Sale of Marijuana Penalties in Texas 1/4 oz – 5 lbs: 6 months – 2 years, $10,000 fine 5 lbs – 50 lbs: 2 – 20 years, $10,000 fine 50 lbs – 1 ton: 5 – 99 years, $10,000 fine 1 ton or more: Mandatory minimum of 10 – 99 years, with a $100,000 fine These are for either the sale OR delivery, meaning it is irrelevant whether or not you are actually paid or just just giving it to someone. [read post]
31 May 2012, 9:59 pm
8:40 Central Time: We're set to begin in 20 minutes. [read post]
31 May 2012, 6:00 am
But that does not mean that “reasonable” should be read out of 20 C.F.R. [read post]
30 May 2012, 10:02 pm
Samsung Electronics Chairmen Lee Kun-hee (right) does not seem to like his elder brother Lee Maeng-hee (left) very much, and vice versa. [read post]
30 May 2012, 10:20 am
This tribunal was trenchant in its criticism of the defendant trust’s behaviour, saying it was ”in flagrant breach of the order of re-engagement made on 20 April 2011? [read post]
29 May 2012, 1:46 pm
Three quick observations: 1. [read post]
