Search for: "Defendant Doe 2" Results 1861 - 1880 of 40,585
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Jun 2012, 4:44 pm
It WILL do the following: 1: Set aside the verdict or plea; 2: Allows the Defendant to tell future employers that they haven't been convicted. [read post]
28 Feb 2009, 9:54 am
., decided 12/2/2008) Since its enactment, the "Graves Amendment" has provided vehicle lessors and renters with a statutory basis for dismissing vicarious liability claims in motor vehicle accident lawsuits. [read post]
9 Dec 2022, 6:55 am by Eric Goldman
And with that, it probably doesn’t make sense to base your web-scraping legal strategy based on what Google does or does not do. [read post]
19 Sep 2022, 7:04 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Plaintiff does not set forth any evidence to show how defendants’ conduct was deceitful, nor how plaintiff was misled by defendants’ conduct. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Petitioner's allegations of employment discrimination based on events that occurred before April 8, 2011 are time-barred under the applicable three-year statute of limitations [see CPLR 214[2]; Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-502[d] and the Continuous Violation Doctrine does not apply in this instance; and2. [read post]
20 Dec 2012, 7:00 am by Docket Navigator
Imagine Enterprises LLC, 2-11-cv-07291 (CACD December 18, 2012, Order) (Gee, J.). [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 6:43 am by Docket Navigator
Metaswitch Networks Corp. et al, 2-14-cv-00033 (TXED January 6, 2016, Order) [read post]
. ___ (2014), ruling by a 7-2 vote that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 ("SLUSA") does not bar state-law securities class actions in which the plaintiffs allege that they purchased uncovered securities that the defendants misrepresented were backed by covered securities. [read post]
7 Feb 2024, 5:00 am
As such, the court found that the Defendant did not owe the Plaintiff any duty under the open and obvious doctrine. [read post]
29 Mar 2019, 4:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
Petitioner's allegations of employment discrimination based on events that occurred before April 8, 2011 are time-barred under the applicable three-year statute of limitations [see CPLR 214[2]; Administrative Code of City of NY § 8-502[d] and the Continuous Violation Doctrine does not apply in this instance; and2. [read post]