Search for: "Defendants A-F"
Results 6461 - 6480
of 29,830
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Aug 2021, 6:47 am
Loney, 219 F.3d 281 (3d Cir. 2000), the Third Circuit held that the “in connection with” requirement would exclude situations in which “the presence of the gun was merely ‘accidental,’ had no ‘purpose or effect with respect to’ [the defendant’s] drug offense, or did not ‘facilitate or have the potential of facilitating’ [the defendant’s] drug dealing. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 7:13 am
Google, Inc., 676 F.3d 144, 154 (4th Cir. 2012)). [read post]
1 Jan 2014, 8:02 pm
Ottaviano, ___ F.3d. ___, Nos. 11-4553 and 13-1119 (3d Cir., December 24, 2013), initially was able, whilst being tried with four, counseled co-defendants, not to raise the ire of the trial judge. [read post]
13 Jun 2011, 7:37 am
Smith's fraud, IIED and copyright infringement claims were dismissed. 17 USC 512(f) claims are notoriously hard to win, but Smith's complaint tells a pretty decent 512(f) story. [read post]
30 Jul 2011, 8:20 pm
Defenders of Wildlife et al. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 9:37 pm
Amador–Leal, 276 F.3d 511 (9th Cir.2002), we held that Rule 11 and due process do not require a district court to inform a defendant of the immigration consequences of his plea . . . [read post]
29 Sep 2014, 6:00 am
Thus, Claimant requested that Employer/Carrier be assessed a Section 14(f) penalty for not making payments in accordance with the Order. [read post]
18 Oct 2022, 12:09 pm
Arce, 49 F.4th 382 (Sept. 8, 2022). [read post]
14 Aug 2017, 6:42 am
Wilson, supra.The court then goes on to point out that[f]ederal appellate courts have addressed similar issues regarding computer and/or internet restrictions. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 1:48 pm
[I]f "an individual who happens to operate a website receives a defamatory 'snail mail' letter from an old friend, the website operator cannot be said to have been 'provided' the information in his capacity as a website service. [read post]
15 Dec 2020, 11:36 am
., 979 F.3d 219 (Nov. 5, 2020). [read post]
6 Feb 2011, 5:31 am
Christopher, 82 F.3d 1081, 1082 (D.C. [read post]
31 May 2009, 11:11 pm
And these two different injuries lead to two different causes of action: [I]f a plaintiff alleges that the defendant's single wrongful act invaded two different primary rights, he has stated two causes of action, and this is so even though the two invasions are pleaded in a single count of the complaint. [read post]
28 Sep 2008, 12:36 am
Little, 178 F.3d 1297, at *4 [published in full-text format at 1999 U.S. [read post]
16 Aug 2015, 10:01 pm
G Adventures, Inc., — F.3d —, 2015 WL 4664237 (2nd Cir. [read post]
18 Nov 2011, 2:17 pm
LS Corp., 626 F. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 8:40 am
Webfeats, 319 F.3d 770 (6th Cir. 2003) to argue that the Sixth Circuit looked with disfavor on using the Safe Distance Rule in Lanham Act cases. [read post]
16 Aug 2017, 7:00 am
The court begins the opinion by explaining that[f]ollowing a jury-waived trial, the defendant was convicted of criminal harassment pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws 265, § 43A(a), based on a series of text messages he sent over a two-hour period to the victim. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 1:45 am
More to the point, the ruling does present an example where “f-cubed” investors have been able to pursue their claims in U.S. courts, notwithstanding Morrison. [read post]
13 Apr 2017, 7:08 am
The cases cited by the defendant concerned material that contained sadistic or masochistic conduct directed at a minor, it is pure dicta to suggest the court would not have applied the enhancement if the violence were directed against towards the defendant. [read post]
