Search for: "Fictitious Defendants 1-3"
Results 1 - 20
of 327
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jun 2013, 6:16 am
Table of Contents Section 1: Use of Fictitious Names or Pseudonyms in Connecticut Courts Table 1: John or Jane Doe Defendants in Civil Matters Table 2: John or Jane Doe Defendants in Summary Process Matters Section 2: Use of Fictitious Business Names in Connecticut Table 3: Use of Fictitious Business Names Section 3: Criminal Impersonation in Connecticut Published: 6/6/2013 9:20 AM [read post]
28 May 2011, 9:13 pm
Suarez-Blanca, No. 1:07-CR-0023-MHS/AJB, 2008 WL 4200156, at *6-7 (N.D. [read post]
15 May 2014, 2:01 pm
It cannot necessarily be assumed that the defendant was merely creating a fictitious payee without intending a criminal design. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 12:35 pm
The Court held that the elements required to establish larceny by false pretenses are: 1) criminal intent to deprive the owner of property; 2) making a false material representation; 3) obtaining the property of another; and 4) reliance by the victim upon the representation. [read post]
14 Apr 2014, 2:28 pm
A Queens Grand Larceny Lawyer said that, this is an appeal by defendant: (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered October 3, 1963, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of two counts of grand larceny in the second degree and of conspiracy as a misdemeanor, and suspending sentence; and (2) from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 24, 1964, which denied his motion for a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 5:00 am
A violation of Section 5 requires a showing that "(1) the defendant directly or indirectly sold or offered to sell securities; (2) through the use of interstate transportation or communication and the mails; (3) when no registration statement was in effect. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 6:27 pm
Customer-1 was also tricked by the defendants into paying falsely inflated invoices. [read post]
11 Feb 2018, 1:48 pm
Id. at *1. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 3:00 am
The plaintiff calculated her damages as follows: (1) rest break premium at $682,848; (2) interest at $99,246; (3) § 203 penalties at $7 million; and (4) PAGA penalties at around $9 million. [read post]
29 Apr 2024, 4:43 am
The appeal was however untimely filed, because it was brought after the expiry of the sixty [60] days period following service of the judgment, provided for in Article 518 § 1 CCP, which began with the fictitious service of the judgment on the Public Prosecutor, to be sent to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in order to be transmitted through diplomatic channels to the addressee, as provided for by Article 134 §§ 1 and 3 CCP. [read post]
24 May 2013, 5:13 am
Doe No. 3, supra. [read post]
8 Nov 2009, 11:01 pm
John Doe No. 3, 775 A.2d 756 (N.J. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 8:58 am
Bettina Heiderhoff: “Fictitious service of process and free movement of judgments” When judgments or court orders are to be enforced in other member states, it is an essential prerequisite that the defendant was served with the document which instituted the proceedings in sufficient time (Article 34 Nr. 2 Brussels I Regulation). [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 9:58 am
The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, of Defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues said DOE Defendants by fictitious names. [read post]
[Eugene Volokh] Revelation of Plaintiff's Gambling Addiction Doesn't Justify Pseudonymity or Sealing
16 Oct 2020, 6:13 am
If the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously is based on fear of retaliation, the court evaluates the following factors: (1) the severity of the threatened harm, (2) the reasonableness of the anonymous party's fears, and (3) the anonymous party's vulnerability to such retaliation (4) the prejudice to the opposing party and (5) the public interest. [read post]
2 May 2009, 1:20 pm
The true names and capacities, whether individual, associate or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are currently unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. [read post]
5 Oct 2017, 12:55 pm
” The law does not apply to: 1. [read post]
14 Apr 2013, 3:06 pm
Id. at *1. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 5:41 am
Making a false statement to the FTC is an offense with a sentencing range of 1 to 3 years in prison and a fine of $1,000 to $5,000. [read post]
1 May 2008, 11:33 am
Gag orders may be issued only when: (1) the activity poses a clear and present danger or a serious and imminent threat to a protected competing interest, (2) the order is narrowly drawn, and (3) no less restrictive means are available. [read post]
