Search for: "Defendants A-F" Results 9221 - 9240 of 29,832
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Nov 2016, 1:57 pm by Eric Barton
In Rodriguez, the defendant worked for the Social Security Administration, which had a policy that the use of its databases to obtain personal information was authorized only when done for business reasons. 628 F.3d at 1263. [read post]
7 Nov 2016, 1:57 pm by Eric Barton
In Rodriguez, the defendant worked for the Social Security Administration, which had a policy that the use of its databases to obtain personal information was authorized only when done for business reasons. 628 F.3d at 1263. [read post]
6 Nov 2016, 9:59 am by Steve Kalar
   “[F]or continuing crimes alleged to have occurred before and after the defendant turned 18, the statute provides no clear answer to the question whether the JDA applies. [read post]
4 Nov 2016, 12:03 pm by Ed. Microjuris.com Puerto Rico
Un buen ejemplo es el proyecto de desarrollo de jugadores, entrenadores, árbitros y otros oficiales de fútbol (soccer) en Cantera, con alcance local e internacional. iii. [read post]
3 Nov 2016, 1:24 pm by Jay
On appeal, the court reversed the trial court’s grant of the defendants’ motion to strike punitive damages because plaintiff’s allegations “[i]f proven…would support an award for punitive damages. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm by Naomi Jane Gray
Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139, 1156 (9th Cir. 2002) (affirming award of $2,308,000 in attorneys’ fees to defendant where plaintiff asserted groundless false advertising claim); Hartman v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 1:26 pm by Naomi Jane Gray
Franklin Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139, 1156 (9th Cir. 2002) (affirming award of $2,308,000 in attorneys’ fees to defendant where plaintiff asserted groundless false advertising claim); Hartman v. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 12:17 pm by Joe Consumer
In a recent Time Magazine cover story, she said: “[F]orced arbitration … is a huge problem. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 7:51 am by Megan Engel (US) and John Akin (US)
  For instance: [I]f the Government pays a particular claim in full despite its actual knowledge that certain requirements were violated, that is very strong evidence that those requirements are not material. [read post]