Search for: "Defendants A-F" Results 1161 - 1180 of 29,811
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Mar 2012, 8:42 am by Daniel E. Cummins
Hickey and Potamkin Hyundai, Inc., to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Punitive Damages Claim Pursuant to F. [read post]
22 Feb 2017, 1:28 pm by Christine
., F.3d, F.2d, F.Supp, U.S.C., C.F.R., plaintiff, defendant, appellant, and respondentSwitch between large and small capsInsert a footnote or commentSpacing: single, 1.5, and double spacingBulletsFor more see: Robert Ambrogi, Debuting Tomorrow: A Keyboard Designed Just for Lawyers, and a video of unboxing and using the board. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 8:00 am by Todd Presnell
Universal Music Group, Inc., 730 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2013). [read post]
31 May 2013, 5:31 am by David A. Beatty
  At issue here was the plaintiff’s failure to attach proof that a corporate officer was individually liable under an alleged written contract to provide telephone services to the corporate defendants. [read post]
6 Dec 2013, 8:00 am by Todd Presnell
Universal Music Group, Inc., 730 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2013). [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 5:18 am
Defendants sought to present their invalidity defense first, arguing that if the patent is invalid, they could not be liable for infringement. [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 5:37 am
Moore (Robbery in first degree; commission of class A, B or C felony with firearm; sentence enhanced for being persistent felony offender in violation of statute (§ 53a-40 [f]); "On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the court improperly denied his motion for a judgment of acquittal because the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to establish that he threatened the use of a firearm at the time of the robbery and (2) his sentence enhancement pursuant to § 53a-40… [read post]
23 Sep 2022, 9:00 am
On August 19, 2022, a magistrate judge of the Colorado District Court held that contribution-defendants cannot assert their own contribution claims under section 113(f) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) because they are only liable for their fair share of response costs. [read post]
31 May 2013, 5:31 am by David A. Beatty
  At issue here was the plaintiff’s failure to attach proof that a corporate officer was individually liable under an alleged written contract to provide telephone services to the corporate defendants. [read post]
6 Jun 2007, 5:12 am
”Citing to the 8th Circuit case In re Charter Commc’ns, Inc., Sec Litig., 443 F.3d 987, 992 (8th Cir. 2006), the court emphasized that participation in a legitimate business transaction that is lacking deceptive purpose or effect shields a party from primary liability. [read post]
24 May 2013, 9:32 am by Jacek Stramski
Harris, 860 F.2d 1012, 1017 (11th Cir. 1988): “[a]s the Eleventh Circuit explained, ‘The sixth amendment protects rights that do not affect the outcome of a trial. [read post]