Search for: "MATTER OF RULES OF EVIDENCE"
Results 8961 - 8980
of 42,246
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2015, 9:57 am
In particular, the court noted that even if the evidence suggested, as a matter of law, that the plaintiff’s primary duty was administrative in nature, this was insufficient evidence to hold that he exercised discretion and independent judgment. [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 9:21 am
Prism has now petitioned the Supreme Court for review with the following simple question: Whether a district court’s factual findings in support of its holding that claims are directed to patent eligible subject matter may be reviewed de novo, as the Federal Circuit requires (and as the panel did in this case), or only for clear error, as Rule 52(a) and corollary Supreme Court precedent require. [read post]
26 Jul 2016, 2:45 pm
The court also ruled that the statute of limitations under Section 2122 had not run in this case, since there was insufficient evidence that the ex-wife “should have known” that the ex-husband had committed fraud. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 7:48 am
Barr was a Hatch-Waxman matter, with Alcon losing on infringement, but surviving as to validity. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 6:49 am
Patent applications with insufficient factual evidence to raise prima facietitle could be rejected under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
5 Nov 2015, 8:41 am
Last week’s Sixth Circuit ruling in Mokdad v. [read post]
10 Oct 2013, 10:15 am
To the non-lawyer such matters may sound like hyper-technical noise. [read post]
6 Jan 2015, 4:43 pm
The court ruled that it is well settled that on a motion for summary judgment in an action to foreclosure a mortgage, a plaintiff/mortgagee, as here, establishes its prima facie right to judgment as a matter of law through the production of the relevant mortgage, the unpaid note and an affidavit attesting to the mortgagor's default. [read post]
31 Jan 2021, 10:31 pm
I don't know whether he saw my commentary before his non-copyrightability ruling. [read post]
14 Oct 2015, 4:30 am
Courts should be able to rule as a matter of law that warnings that mention the condition complained of are adequate as a matter of law. [read post]
26 Nov 2018, 7:15 am
But the Federal Government's motivesw do not matter; what matters is whether the Federal Government acted pursuant to a power delegated to it by the People under our Constitution. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 8:22 pm
Further, there is no evidence that the inconsistent positions were part of an intentional effort to mislead the court. [read post]
15 Aug 2018, 4:00 am
"Thus, said the court, SDHR did not err by adopting the total offset method to determine the value of Seabury's lost pension benefits and confirmed its determination. * See Executive Law §298.** Matter of Rensselaer County Sheriff's Dept. v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 131 AD3d 777.The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_05719.htm [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 4:42 pm
We observe though that Ms Merkin continued to pursue this complaint before us.The second and most concerning aspect is that the statements and submissions made by Ms Merkin in relation to this issue appear to have been made in breach of Rules 63 and/or 64 of the Barristers’ Conduct Rules of theBar Association of Queensland.Those Rules are as follows:63. [read post]
1 Oct 2019, 6:38 am
Rule 10(b)(1). [read post]
26 Jun 2011, 4:47 am
Martin was “nearby” and “not invited to take part in the threshold colloquy,” and that he therefore does not fall within the rule stated in Randolph such that the search should have been barred and the evidence gained from it suppressed. [read post]
9 Jan 2012, 6:00 am
January 4, 2012)*: As an initial matter, the Court concludes that Defendant has not shown his right to this information under Rule 16(a)(1)(E)(i). [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 11:30 am
Plaintiffs filed the appeal after the District Court dismissed their claim under Rule 12(b)(6) based upon its determination that the works in issue were not substantially similar as a matter of law. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 7:58 am
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling, stating that the DOJ provided “substantial” evidence that, for more than a year, the broadcaster “willfully and repeatedly” transmitted radio signals from a different location and at different technical parameters than those specified in the broadcaster’s construction permit. [read post]
12 Jan 2015, 2:15 pm
We have some experience under Federal Rule of Evidence 706 using court-appointed expert witnesses on substantive issues. [read post]
