Search for: "Jane Doe Defendants"
Results 161 - 180
of 1,136
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Jan 2011, 1:53 pm
The California A.G.'s Office thinks it does, which is why it charged him (actually, Todd Dixon) with it, got a guilty verdict from a jury, and defended this verdict in the Court of Appeal. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 2:42 am
When does continuous representation end? [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 12:12 pm
It is when fictitious names like John Doe or Jane Roe are used to mask the identity of parties who cannot be named for concerns of privacy or other legal factors: examples include victims of rape or other sexual offences, parties who are underage and so on. [read post]
2 Jan 2017, 2:23 pm
Although it appears that the plaintiff (or her counsel) was genuinely confused about who (or what) to sue, neither the trial court nor the state court of appeals was sympathetic, ruling that fictitious names such as XYZ Co. or Jane Doe can be used to toll a statute of limitations against an unnamed defendant only in the event that the plaintiff actually does not know the name of the party at the time the case was filed. [read post]
30 Nov 2016, 6:35 pm
Jane Goodman-Delahunty is a professor at Charles Sturt University, Australia. [read post]
30 Mar 2008, 10:24 am
A media account of the suit, captioned Jane Doe v. [read post]
25 Apr 2009, 8:44 am
And now is revealed one of his principal motives - defending torture and his involvement in it. [read post]
26 May 2007, 4:00 pm
I have been a somewhat lonely defender of both Jane Harman and Joe Klein of late, finding that Rep. [read post]
5 Jan 2021, 4:05 am
As summarized by Vanity Fair:The suit was initially filed in August 2019 by Chrissie Carnell Bixler; her husband, Cedric Bixler-Zavala; Marie Bobette Riales; and two Jane Does. [read post]
31 Oct 2022, 11:44 am
In re Jane Doe, No. 22-70098 (Graber w/Friedland & Koh). [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 10:36 am
This alleged death penalty analogy is inapt in at least two respects: (i) it doesn't accurately parallel what happened in Jane Doe’s case; and (ii) it overlooks a fundamental distinction regarding the clients’ obligations in the two cases.In lieu of the first sentence of the SG’s paragraph, the following would be a more accurate analogy to what happened in the Jane Doe case, even if we assume that the government is correct on one… [read post]
24 Mar 2018, 8:20 am
Judge Jane Stranch dissented, joined by Judges Cole, Moore, and Donald, arguing that existing Sixth Amendment jurisprudence allows for a more fact-specific analysis and the conclustion that the defendant's right to counsel did attach pre-indictment, at least in this case. [read post]
30 Dec 2008, 9:53 am
Doe turned around and sued the website on 14 counts, which the court summarizes as claims that "(a) Defendants failed to discover Jane Roe lied about her age to join the website, or (b) the contract terms are unconscionable. [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 1:30 pm
After discovery, plaintiff amended the complaint to add "John Doe/Jane Doe" as a defendant and served process on her uninsured motorist carrier. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 10:32 am
On the other hand, other decisions from federal district courts in California have found that plaintiffs must do no more than plead the elements of a section 1595 claim, including in a case where a Jane Doe plaintiff sued the same defendants that Plaintiffs sue here—those entities that own and operate Pornhub—on very similar grounds. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 4:25 am
It is undisputed that during this visit the defendant Mohan Sharma took his penis out of his pants, masturbated and ejaculated on the plaintiff Jane Doe. [read post]
29 Jul 2016, 11:40 am
The Complaint’s narrative depicts Jane Doe as an altogether willing participant. [read post]
5 May 2007, 2:58 pm
” Thus, the statute does authorize pretrial supervision for any bailable offense. [read post]
27 Aug 2019, 8:28 am
In lieu of revealing her identity, Jane Doe 4 left the lawsuit. [read post]
17 Feb 2020, 4:23 am
The important distinction with the two invasion of privacy torts in issue here, however, is that intrusion on seclusion does not involve publicity to the outside world: they are damages meant to represent an invasion of the plaintiff’s privacy by the defendant, not the separate and significant harm occasioned by publicity.[188] The two Jane Doe cases have recognized that the cap on damages for intrusion upon seclusion may not apply to the other forms of… [read post]
