Search for: "John Doe Defendants 1 - 5" Results 1281 - 1300 of 2,259
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 May 2014, 3:11 pm by Bill Otis
  For example, in order to trigger a 10-year mandatory minimum, a person must possess at least 1 kilogram of heroin, which can sell for an average of $69,117, or 5 kilograms of cocaine, which can sell for an average of $143,680.[5]  It would take at least 220 pounds of marijuana to trigger a 5-year mandatory minimum and 2,204 pounds--more than a ton--of marijuana to trigger a 10-year mandatory minimum.[6] … [read post]
8 May 2014, 1:42 pm by Paul J. Feldman
  Flowroute moved to dismiss the amended complaint, arguing that, unlike the TCPA, the TCIA does not provide individuals with a private right of action. [read post]
29 Apr 2014, 9:01 pm by Sherry F. Colb
Absent some other objectively reasonable basis for pulling over John Doe, however, the police officer in this situation may not stop Mr. [read post]
24 Apr 2014, 6:19 am
Unum’s Vice President and Managing Counsel, John LoBosco, responded “While the prior policy the employer had with Unum permitted benefits to end if the claimant was able to work part-time and was not, the 2007 policy does not contain that provision. [read post]
21 Apr 2014, 2:48 am by Peter Mahler
“The managerial authority that [Nathan] delegated to Scimone in the Agreement,” Justice Ramos wrote, “does not constitute a transfer of property within the meaning of [Estates, Powers & Trusts Law § 1-2.4], and thus, plaintiffs fail to allege a testamentary disposition” (p. 10). [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 7:00 am by Robert Chesney
The discussions between Granick and Edgar and the current and former officials in the audience are unlike any other public discussion we have heard about what NSA does and does not do in the way in the way of content collection and use of the information thus collected. [read post]
5 Apr 2014, 12:21 pm by Jason Rantanen
  For example, the definitional issue: does this change the outcome? [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 1:18 pm by DMLP Staff
§ 1983 2. public disclosure invasion of privacy 3. false light invasion of privacy 4. defamation 5. intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. negligence 7. negligent supervision Naffe subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint naming only Frey and the County as defendant. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 1:18 pm by DMLP Staff
§ 1983 2. public disclosure invasion of privacy 3. false light invasion of privacy 4. defamation 5. intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. negligence 7. negligent supervision Naffe subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint naming only Frey and the County as defendant. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 1:18 pm by DMLP Staff
§ 1983 2. public disclosure invasion of privacy 3. false light invasion of privacy 4. defamation 5. intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. negligence 7. negligent supervision Naffe subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint naming only Frey and the County as defendant. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 1:18 pm by DMLP Staff
§ 1983 2. public disclosure invasion of privacy 3. false light invasion of privacy 4. defamation 5. intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. negligence 7. negligent supervision Naffe subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint naming only Frey and the County as defendant. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 1:18 pm by DMLP Staff
§ 1983 2. public disclosure invasion of privacy 3. false light invasion of privacy 4. defamation 5. intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. negligence 7. negligent supervision Naffe subsequently filed a First Amended Complaint naming only Frey and the County as defendant. [read post]